THE DEMOCRATISATION OF JOURNALISM PRACTICE FOR A POLITICALLY

INFORMED CITIZENRY: THE CAPACITIES OF NEW MEDIA

TO ENGAGE CITIZENS IN PUBLIC LIFE

A CASE STUDY

Debra Anne Adams BJ (Hons) (QUT), BA (Journ) (Monash)

Submitted October 2013

For the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

School of Journalism, Media and Communications

Faculty of Creative Industries

Queensland University of Technology

ii

Keywords

Alternative media, BBC, Blogging, Case study, Citizen journalism, Citizens, Collaboration, Commercial media, Crowdsourcing, Deliberation, Democracy, Independent, Independent news media, Interactivity, Internet, Journalism, Media, Murdoch, Networking, Networked journalism, News, News Corporation, News Limited, OhmyNews, Online, Participation, Public media, User generated content, Web 2.0.

iii

Abstract

This research explores the impact of the World Wide Web on the practice and

purpose of journalism in the period 1997–2011 by examining the ways in which

traditional news media models––public service and commercial—use digital tools

and technologies to inform people and to encourage them to participate in public

debates about current affairs. Through case studies which showcase the various

approaches to networked online news journalism, each media model is examined in

terms of its own social, political and economic milieu, through a detailed look at

well-known exemplars of each. The research is framed by the continuing expectation

that journalism in democratic societies has a key role in ensuring citizens are

informed and engaged with public affairs.

The thesis finds that the use of the World Wide Web by the general population has

impacted on the politics, technologies and tools of journalism in three main ways.

First, it has enabled more people to share more information about more events and

issues in the world than was possible before its general use. Second, traditional

newsrooms have realised that the sum of public knowledge is greater than that in any

news organisation. And finally, as a consequence of the previous points, it has

transformed traditional news media’s approach to almost every aspect of journalism.

The research identifies, describes and analyses the impact of these changes, and the

benefits and challenges for each model as it transitioned from its legacy platform to

the online environment.

In light of the failing commercial business models and the cultural shift in the role

and expectations of the audience, the thesis recommends that traditional media

organisations holistically implement participatory strategies, which will necessarily

place greater emphasis on civic-service.

iv

Table of Contents

Abstract  ......................................................................................................................................  iii  Table  of  Contents  .....................................................................................................................  iv  Table  of  Figures  ........................................................................................................................  vi  Table  of  Tables  .......................................................................................................................  vii  Statement  of  Original  Authorship  ...................................................................................  viii  Acknowledgements  .................................................................................................................  ix  

Chapter  1   Introduction  ..............................................................................................  1  Hypothesis  ................................................................................................................................................  5  Methodology:  Comparative  International  Research  ..............................................................  8  Interpretive  and  Ethnographic  Methodology  .........................................................................  12  Interviews  ..............................................................................................................................................  13  Observation  ...........................................................................................................................................  14  Related  Works  ......................................................................................................................................  14  Chapter  Outline  ....................................................................................................................................  20  

Chapter  2   The  Politics  of  Journalism  ...................................................................  24  The  Crisis  in  Journalism  ...................................................................................................................  27  What  is  journalism  and  what  is  it  good  for?  ............................................................................  31  Deliberative  Democracy  ..................................................................................................................  38  Change  of  Platform  Change  of  Direction  ...................................................................................  46  Conclusion  ..............................................................................................................................................  46  

Chapter  3   The  Web  2.0  News  Environment  .......................................................  51  The  Democratisation  of  Journalism:  A  Review  of  OhmyNews  ........................................  55  Limitations  of  the  Web  as  a  Site  of  Democratic  Citizenship  .............................................  67  Networked  Journalism  .....................................................................................................................  73  Participation  in  Digital  Environments  .......................................................................................  76  Blogs:  The  Noisy  All-­‐rounders  ......................................................................................................  78  Crowdsourcing  in  the  Digital  Environment  ............................................................................  89  Editorially  Controlled  User-­‐generated  Content  .....................................................................  91  Social  Media  ..........................................................................................................................................  94  Conclusion  ............................................................................................................................................  100  

Chapter  4   British  Broadcasting  Corporation  .................................................  103  4.1   A  Public  Media  Business  Model  ............................................................................  105  Research  and  Development  ..........................................................................................................  109  The  Primary  Role  of  BBC  Journalism  .......................................................................................  111  Broadcast  News:  Transition  Online  ..........................................................................................  112  

4.2   Technologies  of  Journalism:  New  Participatory  and  Deliberative  Spaces  .........................................................................................................................................  119  

Networked  Journalism  ...................................................................................................................  120  Crowdsourcing  ...................................................................................................................................  127  Interactivity  and  User-­‐generated  Content  .............................................................................  128  Blogs:  2001–Ongoing  ......................................................................................................................  135  

4.3   The  Tools  of  Journalism:  Social  Media,  Video  and  Instant  Message  Services  and  Data  Analysis  ...............................................................................................  143  Social  Media  ........................................................................................................................................  144  The  Implications  of  Internet  Technologies  on  BBC  Journalism  ....................................  151  Conclusion  ............................................................................................................................................  155  

Chapter  5   Commercial  Models  of  News  Media  ..............................................  159  5.1   News  Limited  Business  Model  ..............................................................................  168  

v

5.2   Print  News:  Transition  Online  .............................................................................  170  5.3   Technologies  of  Journalism:  New  Participatory  and  Deliberative  Spaces

 ........................................................................................................................................  177  Social  Media  ........................................................................................................................................  193  User  Generated  Content  ................................................................................................................  194  Conclusion  ...........................................................................................................................................  195  

Chapter  6   The  Guardian  ........................................................................................  198  6.1   The  Guardian  Business  Model  .............................................................................  199  6.2   Print  News:  Transition  Online  .............................................................................  201  6.3   Technologies  of  Journalism:  New  Participatory  and  Deliberative  Spaces

 ........................................................................................................................................  203  Crowdsourcing:  An  Investigative  Technology  ....................................................................  213  Social  Media  ........................................................................................................................................  219  Conclusion  ...........................................................................................................................................  221  

Chapter  7   The  Elements  that  Shape  the  Politics  of  Journalism  ................  224  7.1   Business  and  Value  Systems  .................................................................................  225  Financial  Problems,  Paywalls  And  The  Fourth  Estate  .....................................................  228  Newsroom  Cutbacks  .......................................................................................................................  230  International  Journalism:  Wounded  in  the  Crisis,  Patched  Up  by  the  Web  ............  232  

7.2   Web  2.0  Transforms  Journalism  .........................................................................  236  Citizen  Participation:  News  Values,  the  Public  Interest  and  Setting  the  Agenda  .  240  User-­‐generated  Content  ................................................................................................................  243  Collaboration  .....................................................................................................................................  244  

7.3   The  Impact  of  the  Democratisation  of  Journalism  on  Objectivity  and  Impartiality  ...........................................................................................................................  245  Conclusion  ...........................................................................................................................................  245  

Chapter  8   Conclusion  ..............................................................................................  253  Appendix  A:  Research  Interviewees  .............................................................................  265  Appendix  B:  The  BBC  Royal  Charter  .............................................................................  265  Appendix  C:  BBC  Floor  Plan  .............................................................................................  267  Appendix  D:  Nick  Robinson  Newslog  ............................................................................  268  Appendix  E:  The  Australian’s  Story  Tip  Page  ............................................................  269  Appendix  F:  Independent  News  Entities  .....................................................................  270  Storyful  .................................................................................................................................................  270  Demotix  ................................................................................................................................................  272  Ushahidi  ...............................................................................................................................................  273  Summary  ..............................................................................................................................................  274  

vi

Table of Figures

Figure  1.1.  Compilation  of  business  models’  sources  of  revenue:  BBC,  the  Guardian  and  News  Limited,  (Images  sourced  from  Google  Images).  .....................................................................................................  12  Figure  3.1.  Internet  Usage  as  percentage  of  population  in  Australia,  United  Kingdom,  and  South  Korea  2003–2012.  Adapted  from  World  Bank,  World  Development  Indicators  and  Internet  World  Stats.  Retrieved  from  http://search.worldbank.org/data?qterm=internet%20access  and  http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats3.htm.  ...................................................................................................  52  Figure  3.2.  An  example  of  Apture.  Adapted  from  The  Ben  Metcalfe  Blog.  http://benmetcalfe.com/blog/2008/08/apture-­‐trial-­‐on-­‐BBC-­‐news-­‐website-­‐a-­‐great-­‐success/  .......  86  Figure  3.3.  An  example  of  a  registered  user’s  profile  page.  Note  that  users  are  required  to  provide  their  real  name.  Adapted  from  the  Guardian.  Guardian.co.uk/discussion/user/thedullfig  .................  89  Figure  4.1.  An  interpretation  of  the  convergence  of  broadcast  and  online  as  described  by  BBC  Director  Future  Media  Ralph  Rivera.  .........................................................................................................................  113  Figure  4.2.  The  original  workflow  incorporating  the  online  production  team  as  an  add-­‐on.  ..........  116  Figure  4.3.  The  workflow  of  the  multimedia  newsroom  incorporating  the  News  Interactive  team  at  the  start  of  the  news  production  process.  ................................................................................................................  117  Figure  4.4.  A  BBC  video  frame  showing  a  photo,  submitted  to  the  BBC  by  a  member  of  the  public,  of  Londoners  experiencing  the  disruption  in  London  Underground  following  the  London  bombings  2005  Adapted  from  (Bakhurst,  2011).  ......................................................................................................................  132  Figure  4.5.  The  rate  of  comments  received  by  the  BBC.  Graph  produced  by  Richard  Summers.  Adapted  from  http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2011/03/new_bbc_comments_module_-­‐_tech.html  ...............................................................................................................................................................................  137  Figure  4.6.  BBC  Moderation  Expenses  August  2009.  Adapted  from  http://www.flickr.com/photos/BBCcouk/3775708172/  (N.  Reynolds,  2009).  ......................................  138  Figure  4.7.  (a)  The  2010  graphic  produced  by  Steve  Herrman  (S  Herrmann,  2010)  for  the  BBC  The  Editors  blog,  which  shows  how  links  to  external  sites  were  included  on  BBC  webpages.  http://www.BBC.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2010/03/BBC_news_linking_policy.html.  (b)  An  example  of  how  the  BBC  provides  readers  with  external  links  to  additional  information.  ..................................  141  Figure  4.8.  A  BBC  News  web  page  showing  the  organisation’s  live  blog  coverage  of  the  2010  General  Election.  Adapted  from  (British  Broadcasting  Corporation,  2010c)  ..........................................  143  Figure  4.9.  The  author’s  interpretation  of  the  BBC’s  information  flows  between  online  news  media  utilities,  including  social  media  and  its  website.  (Images  sourced  from  Google  Images).  ..................  145  Figure  4.10.  The  @PhilippaNews  tweet  alerting  followers  to  watch  the  BBC  News  channel  for  breaking  news.  Adapted  from  BBC  College  of  Journalism  (Thomas,  2012).  .............................................  148  Figure  4.11.  The  first  online  form  used  by  the  BBC  News,  Have  Your  Say  to  crowdsource  information.  Adapted  from  http://news.BBC.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/7708582.stm  ......................  151  Figure  5.1.  A  hyperlinked  text  box  entitled  View  From  The  Bureaus  positioned  on  The  World  page  of  the  Australian  http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world  (retrieved  June  20  2013)  ..........  191  Figure  6.1.  The  launch  page  for  the  Investigate  Your  MP’s  Expenses  initiative  from  the  Guardian  website.  Adapted  from  Guardian  News  &  Media  (2013).  ..................................................................................  214  Figure  6.2.  An  example  of  an  expense  document  provided  by  the  Guardian  for  investigation  by  the  public.  Adapted  from  Guardian  News  &  Media  (2013).  .....................................................................................  215  Figure  6.3.  An  example  of  a  crowdsourced  visualisation.  Adapted  from  Guardian  Datastore  Flickr  http://www.flickr.com/search/groups/?w=1115946%40N24&m=pool&q=MP+Expenses  .............  216  Figure  7.1.  The  range  of  participatory  channels  of  communication  used  by  each  of  the  media  models  included  in  this  study.  The  News  Limited  column  describes  the  communication  channels  used  by  its  national  publication,  the  Australian.  ..................................................................................................  242  

vii

Table of Tables

Table  1.1  ....................................................................................................................................................................................  11  The  Selected  Media  Models  ...............................................................................................................................................  11  Table  3.1  ....................................................................................................................................................................................  58  OhmyNews  Aims  and  Objectives  .....................................................................................................................................  58  Table  3.2  ....................................................................................................................................................................................  93  Types  of  User  Generated  Content  ...................................................................................................................................  93  

viii

Statement of Original Authorship

The work contained in this thesis has not been previously submitted to meet

requirements for an award at this or any other higher education institution. To the

best of my knowledge and belief, the thesis contains no material previously

published or written by another person except where due reference is made.

Signature: Date: October 24 2013

QUT Verified Signature

ix

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank the supervisors of this research, Professor Brian McNair and Dr

Jason Sternberg. I would also like to thank Professor Terry Flew, Dr Lee Duffield,

Dr Ben Goldsmith, Dr Folker Hanusch and Dr Jairo Lugo-Ocando for their

comments.

I give special thanks to all of the journalism industry professionals who generously

and happily gave their time for interviews and follow-up advice, and for their

invaluable insights into the operations and functions of journalism. Thank you to

Peter Alford, Kevin Anderson, Andrew Bolt, Matthew Eltringham, Clive Mathieson,

George Megalogenis, Jean K. Min, Professor Richard Sambrook, James Taranto,

Vicky Taylor and Peter Wilson.

Finally, I would like to thank my family for their patience, encouragement and

support.

x

This work is dedicated to Heather Glenys Rodger (1939–2012)

1

Chapter 1 Introduction

“Journalism is being phased out. It is already gone as we who practiced it

through most of the second half of the twentieth century remember it.

Preserving journalism, as we know it, is probably out of the question.

The real issue is who or what will take over its functions and whether

they will serve the public interest” (P. Meyer, 2003: 11).

“Journalists and everyone else has forgotten what journalism is about.

The particular skills of journalism require the same things it did in the

past, and if we don’t see the skills then we will lose them in the

information. We need to preserve these skills. The idea that journalism

has fundamentally changed is wrong. The ability to access information

has changed” (Marsh, 2011).

The Internet, or more specifically the World Wide Web, has created cultural,

economic, social and political concerns for traditional news media models and the

future of journalism. It has also created a cultural shift in the role and expectations of

“the people formerly known as the audience” (Rosen, 2006). Before the introduction

of the World Wide Web to the general population, traditional news media had

dominated the landscape as the gatekeepers of information. As the gatherers,

reporters and sense makers of local, national and global issues and events, news

media organisations held the power to make decisions about what the public needed

to know and the ways in which news was reported. These decisions were based on a

set of values, laws and ethics designed to shape and regulate the practice of news

reporting. During these times, ordinary citizens, who were largely defined by news

organisations as the audience and consumers, had very little to do with the

production and distribution of news.

Since the 1990s, the evolution of a diversity of Web based technologies has enabled

the citizens of the world to produce content traditionally found only within the

domain of the news industry, such as opinion, comment, investigative research,

images, slideshows, audio, video, and graphics, on any topic imaginable,

independent of traditional news media and made instantly available to anyone with

2

Internet access across dispersed geographical locations at any time. Ordinary citizens

can now use multiple platforms, including traditional news media, to report

eyewitness accounts of important events, such as the London bombings, the 2009

Iran general election riots (Goggin, 2011: 99), Middle East conflicts, the death of

Osama Bin Laden, and natural disasters such as the Iceland volcano eruption,

Brisbane floods and New Zealand earthquakes, to the world (Ahlers & Hessen,

2005). The uptake of Internet communication technologies by “everybody” (Gillmor,

2006) and the inclusion of citizen generated content in traditional media production

and distribution processes suggests there has been a shift toward a democratisation of

journalism, a phenomenon which is proving to be both beneficial and challenging to

the established news industry.

A number of problems have emerged from this paradigm shift, one of which is

finding ways to continue to generate enough revenue to sustain the industry’s

business processes. While the news industry is comprised of many different business

models, almost every news organisation is now faced with different degrees of the

same kinds of economic challenges, namely finding a way to sustain journalism.

The news industry has suffered major economic losses across all of its main sources

of revenue, at a time when it was attempting to establish an online presence. Until

2000, the world’s news industry was dominated by print and broadcast technologies.

Newspapers provided coverage of the daily news and entertainment, but equally

important in the context of generating revenue, they were the primary source of

classified advertisements (Rotman & Forrester, 2008). Since then, many news print

publications have experienced decreased circulation figures, for reasons including

the shift of classifieds from the news industry’s print publications to online sites such

as Craigslist, the rise of multiple and diverse online news and information

publications (Cushion, 2012: 1; Fuller, 2010: 3), the large volume and variety of

other online content such as games, and the increased production cost of newsprint

publications (Ahlers & Hessen, 2005; Rotman & Forrester, 2008). As Internet

technologies developed and access to computers reached saturation levels, people

developed a preference for using online platforms to consume news and information

over the traditional print formats. This then caused advertisers to look beyond the

news industry for new business opportunities.

3

Given the commercial news sector’s almost exclusive reliance on advertising

revenue, which Clay Shirky says, “can no longer be relied on to fund serious

reporting” (Shirky, 2011), the unanswered question that remains as important in 2012

as it was in 2000 is, “who is going to pay for serious reporting” (Gitlin, 2009: 5).

Shirky says the “lost value from print is not made up for by gains in digital

readership” (Shirky, 2011) so production should be cheap and the product should be

free (Shirky, 2011). But not everyone agrees that news should be free. News

organisations throughout the world have grappled with how to reorganise their

business strategies, which include making decisions about whether to impose

subscription levies and, in the US, whether to seek government and philanthropic

funding (Downie & Schudson, 2009). Organisations are now developing business

strategies to meet the objectives of their discretely designed business models that will

determine how the public gain access to online content, ranging from cost free to

various levels of subscription.

The transition from traditional print and broadcast platforms to the online

environment also brought cultural changes that generated further economic

challenges for established news media. As Internet technology continues to evolve,

so too do the tools and technologies of journalism, including hardware, software and

professional practice, all of which add extra cost. Culturally, news services went

from working to routine print and broadcast deadlines to producing content for a

24/7 news cycle, and newsrooms are continually figuring out how to use, develop

and incorporate Web 2.0 technologies and the audience into journalism practice. The

extra costs associated with each change added further financial burden to businesses

that were already in economic hardship (Sambrook, 2011).

Once organisations established an online presence, they were further challenged by

the public’s widespread use of Web tools such as RSS and the many newsfeed

aggregators. The problem with these tools is that they provide users with access to

content without them having to visit the originating news website, thereby

circumventing news consumers from exposure to the advertisements they would

have otherwise seen accompanying the news content.

4

This problem was exacerbated by blogs and other aggregators that created the same

effect of obstructing the regular presence of consumers at the news content’s site of

origin. Some argue that this should not be seen as a problem for established news

media organisations, with the assertion that search engines (Olmstead, Mitchell, &

Rosenstiel, 2011), blogs and aggregators on-send traffic to their sites (Athey &

Mobius, 2012; Jeon & Esfahani, 2012). However, business analysts Rotman and

Forrester, and news media CEO, Rupert Murdoch, reject this view with claims that it

reduces the capacity for news organisations to connect audiences with advertisers.

They firmly highlight the trend as a significant problem that threatens the intellectual

capital and the content created by traditional news providers (Rotman & Forrester,

2008). Murdoch’s viewpoint is best explained in the context of Jack Balkin’s

description of the “propertisation of knowledge and information” (Balkin, 2006).

Balkin contends that the highest costs for the production of knowledge and

information are in the first copy, therefore in the interest of protecting profits and

deterring competitors from cannibalising their content, some businesses will pursue

strategies to monopolise the use of their own content, which is what Murdoch aims

to do.

Each of these problems has created an overall sense of a “crisis in journalism”,

which has become a central topic of debate amongst industry professionals,

independent news providers, business, academia and the citizenry. In addition to the

problems identified above, other topics of debate include: the tension between

commercial interests and editorial imperatives1 (Standage, Rosen, & Carr, 2011); the

loss of valuable newsroom resources, which has affected the quality and

accountability of journalism (Downie & Schudson, 2009); conflict between the ideal

of journalism as an investigative rather than repurposing process (Moeller, 2008:

175); and the industry’s laboured acceptance and adoption of the online environment.

Conversely, encapsulating these many concerns are the potential benefits the Internet

introduces for journalism, including the degree to which news organisations use new

networking technologies, to source, produce and distribute news content, and the

value and role of participatory journalism and deliberative news environments,

enabled by Web 2.0 technologies, to news organisations. The desire to find solutions

to these questions and problems reiterate the considerable value and importance

5

attached first and foremost to acts of primary news reporting,2 and then to other

forms of news journalism in general.

One of the shortcomings of the debate is that it tends to generalise rather than specify

problems and proposed solutions. The range of solutions offered to the many

questions and observations about the direct and indirect effects of the Web on the

practice of journalism in established news media begs for more detail about the

specifics of the changes as they have occurred in different organisations.

Hypothesis

This research investigates the extent to which the use of Web 2.0 technologies and

the participatory media culture have contributed to the democratisation of journalism

during the period 1997–2011. The work contextualises the democratisation of

journalism within the scope of traditional news media organisations and is defined by

the ways in which they have incorporated evolving digital technologies into their

production structures. The democratisation of journalism is also concerned with the

ways in which news organisations have restructured their businesses to participate in

the networked information environment (Benkler, 2006: 1). This restructure involves

the inclusion of the general public and other independent journalism entities as

participants in the news production process, ranging from agenda setting to content

production.

This research categorises the concept of journalism into three distinct yet

interconnected components: the politics, technologies and tools of journalism. The

politics of journalism is the broadest category covering the cultural, economic, social

and political concerns affecting both macro and micro levels of the news industry.

The technologies of journalism include practices such as computer assisted reporting

and networked journalism. The tools of journalism include notebooks, computer

hardware and applications including social media, digital mobile technologies such

as smart phones, cameras, tablets and so on.

The research is framed by the notion that journalism has an obligation as the Fourth

Estate to ensure citizens are informed and engaged with the issues that affect their

lives. It explores the impact of the World Wide Web on the practice and purpose of

6

journalism by examining the ways in which different media models, public service

and commercial, use digital tools and technologies of journalism to inform people

and to encourage them to participate in public debates about current affairs.

This thesis argues that the use of the World Wide Web by the general population has

impacted on the politics, technologies and tools of journalism in three main ways.

First, it has enabled more people to share more information about more events and

issues in the world than was possible before its emergence for general use. Second,

traditional newsrooms have realised that the sum of public knowledge is greater than

that in any single news organisation. And finally, as a consequence of the previous

points, it has transformed traditional news media’s approach to almost every aspect

of journalism. The research identifies, describes and analyses the impact of these

changes, and the benefits and challenges for public and commercial media models as

they transition from their legacy platforms to the online environment.

The thesis contends that digital news environments provide people with greater

access to more information, multiple perspectives, and a diversity of voices, in what

is described here as a discursive network of public spheres, than was possible via

traditional print and broadcast platforms (Moeller, 2008: 184; G. Turner, 2010: 71).

It reviews the role of journalism in a democracy; compares and contrasts traditional

and new relationships between journalism and civil society; reviews how methods of

journalism such as crowdsourcing and networking have evolved through the use of

digital platforms; examines how newsrooms incorporate the use of news blogs and

social media into the practice of engaging citizens with a form of democratic

deliberation (Coleman & Blumler, 2009); considers the value to journalism practice

and the public debate of including the personal viewpoints of citizens in news blog

comment forums and message boards; investigates how and why news organisations

incorporate user-generated content into their news production process; and analyses

the benefits and challenges, associated with this practice, to newsrooms and citizens.

Finally, the research provides a critical perspective on the ways in which each media

model defines citizens.

The research began with an examination of the notion that individuals within

democratic societies were disconnecting from the public political debate. These ideas

7

evolved from a range of academic viewpoints expressing concern that the general

news media no longer adequately fulfilled its democratic function3 (Merritt and

McCombs 2004: 47). A preliminary review of the literature (D. Adams, 2006)

identified several theories that attempted to explain this phenomenon, including

changing cultural values, the intensified marketing of politics, the dependency of

journalism on commercial funding, cost cutting within the news media, concentrated

media ownership and the loss of investigative reporting and foreign bureaus

(McChesney, 2011: 54; Osnos, 2009: 1). It found each of these factors

counterproductive to news journalism's primary purpose, which is to create an

inclusive and diverse space for deliberative conversations between members of

society about public affairs, to monitor the activities of government and business,

and to mobilise citizens to exercise their democratic rights (McChesney, 2011: 53).

Early investigations into the idea that the rise of independent media, particularly the

blogosphere, had a primary role in the problems of the news media that may

ultimately lead to the “death of media” (Kamlya, 2009; McChesney & Nichols,

2010; Schechter, 2005) found that traditional news media remains as important to

society today as it was before the emergence of the World Wide Web. While the

blogosphere does absorb some of the traditional media’s audience share, the large

established organisations still distribute more original news to a larger audience than

any other news provider model. Ahlers and Hessen argument suggests that the early

discourses warning of the impending collapse of big media were greatly exaggerated

(Ahlers & Hessen, 2005: 65). These have since evolved to discourses of co-

existence. Most news media organisations are now of the opinion that an interactive

and collaborative relationship with the public and other independent journalism

entities4 is the ideal model.

Despite the many cutbacks and closures of traditional newsrooms, traditional news

organisations still have more journalists on the ground covering more events and

issues than anyone else (Rosenstiel, 2009a). More recently, Richard Sambrook,

former BBC Director of Global News, said traditional news media is more important

now than it has ever been before (Sambrook, 2012: 3). Others note that society’s

need for traditional news media is most pronounced during times of crisis, when the

8

public turns to established media, more than any other source, in search of

information and context (Rosenstiel, 2008).

The significance of the debates and challenges surrounding journalism as a practice,

as an institution of democracy, and as a product of business, is explained via a

detailed analysis of how three different news media models approach some of the

biggest professional and economic challenges in the history of news media. It

considers the ways in which national, international, public and commercial news

organisations attempt to secure and increase business interests and social capital in a

digital environment while continuing to function as a public service for democratic

societies.

Methodology: Comparative International Research

At a time when the world is intricately connected by a diversity of social, political

and economic relationships, the idea of undertaking comparative international

research holds significant relevance. Sonia Livingstone says one of the main benefits

of “cross-national” (Livingstone, 2003: 478) research is its capacity to change

“generalised” (Livingstone, 2003: 489) findings to substantiated theory through

comparative analysis. Frank Esser and Thomas Hanitzsch contend that comparative

research enables the researcher to “test theories across diverse settings and evaluate

the scope and significance of certain phenomena” without reducing conclusions to

“naïve universalism” (Esser & Hanitzsch, 2012: 4). It provides a framework from

which to observe and contrast a variety of cultural systems, which include

organisational/institutional systems in addition to “cross territorial” comparisons

(Esser & Hanitzsch, 2012: 6). Furthermore, it establishes networks of research that

“foster global scholarship” and creates a bank of “practical knowledge and

experience” (Esser & Hanitzsch, 2012: 4)

Livingstone notes that this kind of research is sometimes criticised because it has a

tendency to generate findings that relate to the notion of nation (Livingstone, 2003:

483) (see, for example, Esser and Hanitzsch’s definition of comparative research

(Esser & Hanitzsch, 2012: 5)). This research is not concerned with nation, rather it

focuses on specific characteristics and processes associated with particular

phenomena. It aims to examine a particular process in different contexts (Esser &

9

Hanitzsch, 2012: 5; Livingstone, 2003: 479), namely the use of Web 2.0 technologies

in various models of news media, then to identify what is “unique or contrasting,

atypical or widespread” (Livingstone, 2003: 483) in each context.

This research provides an international comparative analysis of the ways in which

three specific public service and commercial models of news media use digital Web

2.0 technologies to:

• Enable them to achieve their economic, social and political objectives;

• Gather, analyse, publish and distribute news journalism;

• Provide multiple entry points for citizens of all levels of education and social

status to participate in the news process and public debates;

• Encourage and develop citizen participation in the political public sphere; and

• Enhance the collaborative relationship between professional news producers,

citizens and other journalism entities.

It poses the question:

How has the migration of print and broadcast news production to

online news environments transformed the capacity for commercial

and public news media models to provide the public with new

participatory and deliberative spaces, and what are the implications

for the professional practice of journalism?

This research contains an original international collective case study of a variety of

print and broadcast news media models in two main categories: commercial and

public service. The case studies showcase various approaches to networked online

news journalism. Each media model is examined in terms of its own social, political

and economic milieu, taking a detailed look at well-known proponents of each:

British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) (Publicly funded Public Service

Broadcaster); News Limited newspaper publications including the Australian and the

Herald Sun (Commercial Business Model),5 and the Guardian newspaper (Hybrid

Commercial/ Trust Business Model).

10

Media models were selected based upon their relevance within the news media

domain (see Table 1.1). Each has worldwide significance and influence. The

inclusion of a variety of different cases was designed to gain insight into a wider

range of interesting variables and dimensions, and to provide a broader theoretical

framework from which to understand and find solutions to the research problem.

The news organisations selected for this study are categorised according to their

similarities and differences. Two generic business models currently dominate the

news industry, commercial and public, and each has atypical variations. Business

models are representative of an organisation’s founding business principles, interests

and values, and consist of a mission statement or set of business goals, and strategies

to fulfil organisational aims, operational policies, financial funding, infrastructure,

business processes and operational practices. Commercial business models are

generally founded on a desire to generate income for the organisation’s financial

stakeholders, although this research also describes a unique exception. Ordinarily,

their sources of revenue include shareholders, classified advertising, display

advertising, 6 sponsored content, 7 reader offers, 8 and, in some instances,

philanthropists.

Being commercial organisations, News Limited and the Guardian have designed

particular business models to achieve their business and social objectives. News

Limited is founded solely on a commercially oriented profit-driven model, which

seeks to maximise returns for its shareholders. The Guardian’s business model

departs from the traditional commercial model in two ways. First, its funding is

derived from both commercial means and through the Scott Trust.9 Second, income

generated through commercial means is reinvested in the business to sustain its

journalism rather than to benefit shareholders (Guardian Media Group, 2010b).

The BBC is the world’s leading public service media organisation. It is funded

through an annual licence fee paid by all UK households, which makes its economic

model unique. A Royal Charter ensures the BBC fulfils its obligation to provide

socially responsible journalism to the UK public. BBC News was one of the earliest

innovators of Web 2.0 tools and technologies for the practice of journalism.

11

Table 1.1

The Selected Media Models

Figure 1.1 shows the various revenue sources of the media models included in this

study. It is important to understand the components of the business model of each

because they have a direct effect on how each defines publics, their inclusiveness of

citizens and the democratisation of their journalism.

The BBC, Guardian and News Limited each generate revenue from advertising,

however the BBC’s advertising stream is limited to international audiences only. The

Guardian is also funded by a private trust, a newspaper cover price and mobile apps. News Limited generates revenue from a newspaper cover price, online subscriptions,

mobile apps and News Corporation shareholders (News Corporation compensates

News Limited for its financial losses).

Media Model

Publication Name

Content

Commercial

Australian

Herald Sun

Blogs (Megalogenis Blog), news columns, citizen content and social media. Bolt Blog

Wall Street Journal

Opinion Blog and social media.

Commercial Hybrid

guardian.co.uk

Blogs, news columns, citizen content (including Comment is Free), and social media.

Public Funding

news.bbc.co.uk

BBC Blog Network, columns, citizen content and social media.

12

Figure 1.1. Compilation of business models’ sources of revenue: BBC, the Guardian and News

Limited, (Images sourced from Google Images).

Interpretive and Ethnographic Methodology

The case study paradigm provides interpretive and ethnographic frameworks with

specific methods of data collection and analysis, which for this research incorporates

a review of literature from the relevant academic disciplines, industry studies,

historical contextualisation, policy analysis, and empirical data including interviews

with key editors and journalists, obtrusive observation in a BBC newsroom, and

unobtrusive observation of online websites. This evidence-based approach was

selected because it uses multiple methods of data collection, and so provides

“multiple sources of evidence” all of which “converges on the same topic” (Yin,

1989: 84) to enable a more accurate interpretation of the data (Jensen & Jankowski,

1991: 54; Stake, 2001: 443). Furthermore, it has the capacity to “cast an important

light” (Repko, Newell, & Szostak, 2012: 4) on the specifics of the range of problems

being addressed.

Shareholders

Private Trust

Advertising

Licence Fees

Cover Price

Online Subscriptions

Mobile Apps

13

Interviews

Interviews were conducted in 2008–09 with a purposive sample of senior journalists

and editors drawn from the online news site of organisations from each media

model.10 Semi-structured in-depth11 interviews provided opportunities to explore

new significant information about the editorial staffs’ first-hand experiences of the

impact of Web 2.0 technologies on the day-to-day practice of established

professional journalism. The interviews, which occurred in “one session per

interviewee” (Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2010: 93–102), also provided the researcher

with the opportunity to ask professionals to provide specific information on the

comparisons between the practices particular to their own organisation and those

they had observed in other organisations. Since each of the informants were selected

based on their extensive knowledge, experience and high profile in the field of

journalism, they were able to provide educated and experiential viewpoints of

professional journalism overall.

Face-to-face interviews with journalists and editors from the BBC, Guardian, Wall

Street Journal, two Australian foreign correspondents and the OhmyNews

communications director were conducted in London, New York, Japan and Seoul.

In-person interviews are known to provide researchers with a deeper understanding

of what the informants say based on the presence of interpersonal communication

cues such as body language (Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2010: 99). A potential limitation

of the interview process employed in this research is that three of the News Limited

participants were interviewed via the phone12 rather than face-to-face. However, each

participant was candid with their responses and advised of their willingness to make

themselves available to the researcher for further questioning and clarification of

information at any time throughout the research process.

Editors and journalists were asked how they thought the use of Web 2.0 technologies

had impacted on the relationship between journalists and citizens. Here they were

able to comment on their own feelings, their professional experience, their

observation of the ways in which the public and journalists interact, and the use of

digitally based tools and technologies of journalism within their own organisation,

the wider news industry and by the general public. Editorial staff members were also

asked whether the tools and technologies of contemporary journalism had changed,

14

and if so what were the benefits and challenges of the changes to the traditional

practice and the politics of journalism. 13 The interviews were guided by true

curiosity and a desire to discover new information (Garber, 2011).

Observation

While conducting interviews at the BBC, I was invited by the Editor of Interactivity

Vicky Taylor to sit and observe the work practices of journalists in the newsroom as

they contacted sources to talk about topics related to events in Asia and the Middle

East. Journalists explained how they managed content and used databases to store

lists of case studies containing details about events, issues and sources, which

included information about identity, location, credibility, authority experience,

connections and so on. The observations made during this time supported a number

of assertions from BBC editors during the interviews about the BBC’s verification

processes and the strength of its relationship with members of the public throughout

the world. While I did not have access to private conversations between sources and

journalists, I was able to observe the professional manner in which journalists

interacted with individual members of the public on matters of a general nature. I

was also better able to understand the logic of the process as it was explained and

demonstrated by the journalists.

Related Works

In 2004, Nick Couldry identified a need for international comparative research that

describes the ways in which new technology is incorporated into old media traditions

to create new modes of production and citizen engagement (Couldry, 2004: 27).

Since that time, there have been multiple studies into particular aspects of the use of

Web 2.0 technologies in traditional news media settings, including the ways in which

the BBC uses blogs during elections (Thorsen, 2009), to cover war (D. Bennett,

2011), to achieve greater transparency and accountability (Hermida, 2008) and Paul

Bradshaw’s (2010) research into the impact of blogging on the practice of

journalism. Other research has focused on the ways in which British news providers,

print and broadcast, have incorporated the use of user-generated content into their

news services (Singer & Ashman, 2009; Wardle & Williams, 2008), the response to

social media by UK news media (Newman, 2009), a review of the ways Australian

public news media incorporates user-generated content into its news services (Flew,

15

2011), and a new theory of the Fifth Estate14 (Dutton, 2009). The following

discussion outlines the methods, purpose and findings of each of these research

projects and describes the role each played in the way the methodology of this

research was constructed.

Einar Thorsen’s 2009 study used web dialogue analysis to review the value of the

online spaces that were created by the BBC in 2005 for the particular purpose of

encouraging a global conversation about the UK election. This study was primarily

concerned with the nature and relevance of dialogue between user-participants in

specific BBC comment forums, to the organisation’s “commitment to providing

‘democratic value and civic engagement’” (Thorsen, 2009: 233). Unlike Thorsen’s

research, this study does not seek to undertake a quantitative analysis of dialogue

between user-participants in blog comment forums, rather it more specifically

focuses on how established news media responded to the challenges of Web 2.0 and

participatory media culture to professional practice and its role as the Fourth Estate.

Nevertheless, Thorsen’s study informs this research on a range of topics including

online participation, deliberation and civic engagement at the BBC.

Using an ethnographic mixed method approach, Daniel Bennett’s 2011 study of the

impact of blogging on the BBC’s coverage of war and terrorism provided him with

direct access to a range of BBC services, allowing him to experience issues and

events as they arose in each area. The study used both participant and unobtrusive

observation to show how BBC journalists incorporated citizen bloggers into their

contact books 15 thereby expanding their networks of collaboration. While this

research is not informed by participant observation to the same extent, it undertakes

interviews and unobtrusive observation to show the ways in which the tools and

technologies of journalism have evolved with Web 2.0 technology. Bennett’s work

informs this research on the value and challenges of collaborative reporting for the

BBC.

Alfred Hermida conducted a seven-year study into the ways in which the BBC uses

blogs to achieve greater transparency and accountability. The study is comprised of

documentary evidence and interviews with key developers of the BBC’s blogging

strategy (Hermida, 2010: 308). While the study found blogs to be an effective way

16

for the BBC to explain itself to the public, Hermida notes that the organisation was

“yet to embrace blogs fully as a platform for a conversation with the audience”

(Hermida, 2010: 314).

In 2008, Paul Bradshaw surveyed 200 professional journalists in thirty countries to

discover how blogging had affected their work process. The study took account of

the relationship between journalists and the audience during three key stages of

production: ideas, newsgathering and story production (Bradshaw, 2010a: 99). The

findings indicated that while journalists did not believe that blogging had completely

changed the way they work, they said that blogging had in some ways changed their

traditional routines, since they were increasingly utilising the audience for research

and verification practices (Bradshaw, 2010a: 105).

Jane Singer’s 2009 case study of the Guardian’s website showed how the news

provider incorporates user-generated content into its “perceptions and practices”

(Singer & Ashman, 2009: 3). The study uses in-depth interviews and a questionnaire

to gauge how journalists navigate their ethical responsibilities to verification,

autonomy and accountability. The study found Guardian journalists had increased

their attention to accuracy and raised concerns about the effects of uncivil/abusive

comments produced by the general public on the credibility of the Guardian (Singer,

2011: 129). The study also found that journalists were guarded about allowing public

participation to impact on their own professional news judgment (Singer, 2011: 126).

Singer proposed that future research might aim to discover ways for journalists to

optimise their relationships with the public, and by 2011 she had observed that

“many newspapers have sought and, in some cases, implemented ways to boost that

‘human contact’ with their contributors” (Singer, 2011: 136).

In 2003, David Domingo conducted ethnographic research, which saw him spend

time in four European online news sites (Domingo, 2008: 690). His cases of study

were selected on the basis of their different backgrounds, which he says enabled him

to better compare their similarities and differences (Domingo, 2007: 11). Using in-

depth interviews with reporters, editors and web developers (Domingo, 2008: 680),

Domingo said he found online journalists continued to reproduce mass media models

of journalism, which enabled them to dominate the production of content for the

17

website, while the presence of the public existed in its traditional passive capacity

(Domingo, 2007: 11). Domingo concluded that myths about interactivity were the

product of the high expectations of changes that may evolve with the use of digital

technologies (see Chapter 1). He said that while journalists embraced the notion of

interactivity, the reality of its practice saw journalists “perceive audience

participation as a problem to manage rather than a benefit for the news product”

(Domingo, 2008: 697). Like Couldry (2004), Domingo identified the need for a

cross-country study to explore international differences. Moreover, he suggested that

future studies take account of the “meso- and macro-context factors surrounding

online newsrooms: the market context (size of the companies, ownership,

competitors’ strategies – both professional and citizen media) and the social context

(public sphere history, information society policies, media laws)” (Domingo, 2008:

699).

Hermida and Thurman’s study investigates the way newspaper websites in the UK

use user-generated content (UGC). The study found many newsrooms were

incorporating this kind of content into their service with uncertainty about its overall

value. It also revealed that UCG is subject to the same kinds of editorial control as

any content in their publications (Hermida & Thurman, 2008).

Claire Wardle and Andy Williams’ 2008 research on the BBC’s use of user-

generated content was comprised of six different methodologies, including obtrusive

observation in the newsroom of nine different programs, exploratory and semi-

structured interviews (Williams, Wardle, & Wahl-Jorgensen, 2011: 88) with 125

BBC staff members including journalists, managers and executives, analysis of radio

and television news content, online survey, focus groups and a review of a national

report on news media. The study aimed to find out how various levels of BBC

editorial staff and the public perceived and approached user-generated content. It

found that the use of user-generated content is an extension of what the BBC has

always done, that is to take account of what the public has to say on matters in its

interest. While the BBC has embraced the use of user-generated content, it continues

to exert editorial control over what it publishes (Wardle & Williams, 2008: 41;

Williams et al., 2011: 85).

18

These authors identified a need for the BBC to “proactively seek out participation in

communities and groups which traditionally remain under the radar of mainstream

media” (Wardle & Williams, 2008: 41). Their work also highlighted the need for a

greater understanding of the value of collaborative content and networked

journalism. In response to this, this research examines the possibilities and value of

collaborative and networked journalism to traditional news media practice.

Bill Dutton’s work on the Fifth Estate finds it is comprised, in part,16 of networked

individuals who use the Internet to “increase the accountability of the other Estates”

(Dutton, 2009: 13), including the Fourth Estate. Nick Newman’s 2009 study into the

ways in which the UK news media have responded to social media found that

increased popularity and uses of participatory communities complemented the

capacity of journalists to construct the stories they need to tell (Newman, 2009: 50).

Interviews with journalists in key news organisations and journalism academics

highlight the concepts of networked journalism, partnerships and the Fifth Estate,

raise interesting questions about how to sort out truth from opinion and untruths, and

how to maintain deliberative environments on a mass scale. Both Newman and

Dutton’s work provides this research with a framework for understanding the use of

Web 2.0 technologies as a method of enhancing existing and creating new networks

of accountability.

Terry Flew’s ethnographic action research17 into public service media and citizenship

is a case study which examined the digital strategies used by the Special

Broadcasting Service (SBS) to harness user created content (UCC).18 The research

establishes the value of public service media and identifies the benefits and

challenges posed to the traditional editorial practices by the use of user generated

content (Flew, 2011: 224). While the research concentrates on SBS, like Wardle and

William’s study of the BBC, it provides a broader framework from which to observe,

understand and analyse the purpose of journalism and media citizenship.

Stephen Cushion’s recent international comparative research into the distinctiveness

of public service journalism compared to market-driven news examined the

democratic value of each service to citizens (Cushion, 2012: 2). Cushion’s

methodology includes content analysis of the various types of news content produced

19

by different broadcast news media models. His findings indicated that public service

broadcasters were valuable and important to citizenship in democracies (Cushion,

2012: 206).

Each of these related works has informed this thesis to various degrees. This research

aims to combine all of the topics described in these works into a holistic and

cohesive comparative analysis of a variety of internationally acclaimed news media

models. It analyses the ways in which established news media incorporate and

develop digital tools and technologies of journalism with traditional journalism

practices. It analyses the ways in which each news media model has incorporated

participatory tools such as blogs, and collaborative technologies such as citizen

produced content, into their news services. The research examines the ways in which

professional journalists in commercial and public service news organisations seek to

interact with the public, so it can gauge whether the use of Web 2.0 technologies has

altered the production and distribution of the news (Livingstone, 2003: 479). The

study will also examine the extent to which each of the established news media

organisations networks with what Dutton refers to as the Fifth Estate (Dutton, 2009),

which includes journalism entities such as WikiLeaks, Demotix, Storyful and

Ushahidi. In identifying what the “unique or contrasting, atypical or widespread”

(Livingstone, 2003: 483) qualities of each media model are, the study will draw

conclusions about the differences between the ways in which each media model

defines citizens in their approach to their role as the Fourth Estate.

The research aims to contribute new information to the domains of Journalism,

Media and Communications, and Internet Studies. The work differs from previous

studies because it examines how the use of Web 2.0 technologies by different media

models impact on the micro and macro elements of journalism. The research takes

account of the size of the organisations, their business models and business strategies

in relation to their competitors, all in the context of theories of the Fourth Estate

(including public sphere and citizenship), deliberation, participation (Oates, Owen, &

Gibson, 2006: 15), democratisation and networked journalism. The research is

designed around models of media, tools and technologies of journalism, and the

Fourth Estate.

20

Chapter Outline

Chapter 1 provided an introduction to the topic, contextualised the problem, posed

the research question, defined the scope and the purpose of the research, described

the methodologies used, listed related works and explained why the research is

important. The chapter has also identified the stakeholders and stated the original

contribution of the research.

Chapter 2 will review the literature relevant to the politics of journalism. It positions

journalism within an industry that is suffering extreme financial pressure, undergoing

significant cultural change and facing challenges in every aspect of practice. It

provides a critical evaluation of the definitions and theories of journalism from the

viewpoint of its role as the Fourth Estate and as one of the key institutions of

democracies. In doing so, the review drills deeper into the finer details of the

historical role of journalism in a democratic society. Its exploration of the

interconnectedness of notions of democratic deliberation, public sphere and

citizenship construct a framework from which to understand the evolving challenges

for journalism in a variety of organisational settings and contemporary

circumstances.

Chapter 3 reviews the elements that constitute the tools and technologies of

journalism, including network theory, network journalism, participation,

crowdsourcing, user-generated content, blogs and social media. It reviews the

traditional and new relationships between journalism and civil society through an

examination of the ways in which new tools and technologies can contribute to a

democratisation of journalism and enhance its role in society.

Drawing on the history of democracy in South Korea, this chapter includes a review

of the democratising effects of Web 2.0 tools and technologies of journalism,

incorporating participation, active engagement, collaboration and networked

journalism, as used by OhmyNews. It draws on the ways in which this alternative

online news service circumvented the control held by Korea’s traditional news media

to diversify the voices and information that defined the public debate and its impact

on the democratisation process of South Korea. An in-depth interview with

OhmyNews Communications Director Jean K. Min provides the research with

21

empirical insight into the organisations’ philosophy and editorial policy and

processes, which serves as a framework from which to understand the ways in which

traditional news media models undertake initiatives that encourage public

participation. The discussion then describes the elements of networked journalism,

which frame the politics, tools and technologies of journalism in each of the selected

case studies. Finally, the chapter describes the key points in the debate about the

limitations associated with the concept of democratisation.

Chapter 4 is a case study of the British Broadcasting Corporation. It provides a brief

history of the organisation, a description of its Royal Charter, and purpose. The

chapter provides an overview of the publicly funded news organisation’s approach to

journalism and the ways in which its social and legal obligations to the public are

met.

Beginning its public service as broadcaster, this chapter shows the BBC’s transition

to an online news service that provides twenty-four hour news coverage across

multiple digital platforms. As part of this transition, news blogs have evolved as part

of the BBC news service since 2001.

Using interviews with specialist interactive media editors and a global news media

director, this chapter describes the way the BBC use news blogs and a variety of

social media platforms to engage citizens with the kinds of topics that enable them to

develop an understanding of important issues.

Chapter 5 is a case study of one of News Limited through particular reference to one

of its holdings, the Australian. It also refers to the Herald Sun and one of News

Corporation’s US holdings, the Wall Street Journal.

The chapter begins with a brief history of News Limited before introducing the

corporation’s CEO and the ideological challenges facing commercial news

organisations. The discussion then turns to a description of the Internet based News

Digital Media, which provides the framework for the organisation’s business model,

before it describes and analyses News Limited’s transition from print to online in the

context of news production, distribution and journalism practice.

22

Drawing on interviews with key editors and journalists from London, Japan, New

York and Australia, the discussion then turns to the ways in which individual

journalists approach the Web 2.0 environment. Importantly, this section compares

and contrasts the diversity of professional viewpoints about interactivity, the use of

Web 2.0 tools and new technologies of journalism from within one commercial

organisation. The descriptions and analyses of two of News Limited’s most popular

political blogs provide an insightful contrast between each of them and with

journalists in the other media models included in this study.

Chapter 6 is a case study of the Guardian. It provides a brief history of the

publication, a description of its business model, and explains the significance of the

Scott Trust to the practice of journalism at the Guardian. It describes and analyses its

approach to networked journalism through a review of the tools and technologies it

uses to connect, collaborate and share content with all sectors of an international

community. It describes and analyses one of the organisation’s earliest uses of

crowdsourcing as an investigative technology of journalism. The analysis of the MP

Expenses issue in 2009 shows the benefits of crowdsourcing to both the public and to

the news organisation.

Chapter 7 describes the elements that shape the politics of journalism. This chapter

critically analyses the business and value systems of journalism, and considers the

impact of the crisis in journalism and the use of Web 2.0 technologies on elements

such as international journalism, objectivity and impartiality. It examines how the

incorporation of participation, user-generated content and collaboration into the

business strategies of news media models has contributed to a democratisation of

journalism.

Chapter 8 draws conclusions and proposes future areas of research. 1 Advertisers are less concerned with investigative journalism, foreign affairs and government issues, than entertainment and sports news and events, therefore these areas of the profession have “suffered the heaviest cuts.” See Nicholas Carr in News Industry Debate: http://www.economist.com/debate/days/view/720. This assertion is also supported in a 2010 US report, ‘Abandoned Agencies’, which says news organisations have “abandoned their posts” as watchdogs of the key institutions of society (Enda, 2010). 2 Primary news reporting describes the first hand reports of facts about ‘who, what, where, when, why and how.’

23

3 See also (Turner, 2005; Norris, 2000: 3; Dyrenfurth, 2005: 87-109; Deuze, 2006; Irby & Bird, 2007; McChesney & Nichols, 2010: 12; Coleman & Gøtze, 2001: 4). 4 This may include a range of entities such as WikiLeaks, Storyful, Ushahidi and Demotix. 5 The study also refers to a News International publication, the Wall Street Journal. 6 Businesses produce advertisements for their products to be appropriately placed in news publications. News organisations have little if any input into advertisements. 7 Editorial staff and advertisers collaborate to produce sponsored content for news publications. These are sometimes produced as supplements and are not connected to the editorial component of the publication. 8 Businesses work in partnership with the publication to offer readers various deals on the products from their range. 9 The Scott Trust was created to ensure financial and editorial independence of the Guardian (Guardian Media Group, 2010b). The Scott Trust is discussed in more detail in Chapter 5. 10 See Appendix A for a full list of interviewees. 11 According to Hesse-Biber & Leavy: “In-depth interviews are issue related” (Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2010: 95). 12 All News Limited editors and journalists made themselves available for face-to-face interviews but travel fund allocation for this research was exhausted before the interviews occurred. 13 The phrase “the politics of journalism” was not explicitly expressed to the interviewees. Rather, references were made to particular aspects of the politics of journalism such as the economic crisis of journalism, the conflict between commercial and public service journalism and so on. 14 Dutton contends “the Fifth Estate allows networked individuals to employ the Internet to increase the accountability of the other Estates, for instance by challenging government policies and Fourth Estate sources” (Dutton, 2009: 10–11). 15 Len Granato describes the contact book as a database, which stores people’s names and need-to-know information about them and their expertise (Granato, 2003: 114). 16 Dutton acknowledges the “double-edged nature” of the Internet whereby the “space is over-occupied by an ill-informed, ill disciplined’ cult of the amateur” (Dutton, 2009: 11) 17 Terry Flew supervised the ethnographic action research project undertaken by Heidi Lenffer whose Master of Arts thesis, titled User-Generated Content and Public Broadcasters: A Case Study of the Special Broadcasting Service, was awarded by the Queensland University of Technology in 2009. The thesis can be accessed at http://eprints.qut.edu.au/30419/ 18 Referred to as user-generated content (UGC) throughout this thesis.

24

Chapter 2 The Politics of Journalism

This chapter comprises an interdisciplinary review of academic literature in the fields

of journalism, democracy, the public sphere, participation, and Web 2.0

technologies. It provides an historical background that explains the complexities of

journalism in democratic societies. The discussion theoretically grounds the ways in

which we understand how the business and practice of journalism has evolved,

especially since the uptake of Web 2.0 technologies by news media and citizens.

This review will critically evaluate the key concepts, definitions and theories of

journalism from the viewpoint of its role as the Fourth Estate and as one of the key

institutions of democracy. Since one of the aims of the research is to discover how

particular media models use Web 2.0 technologies in their approach to their role as

members of the Fourth Estate, this review provides a framework from which to

contrast the theoretical principles with the real world challenges. The literature

review is an essential element of the case study method because, as previously stated,

it allows the researcher to gain particular insight into the variables between the

values and practices of individual cases.

The review of the Fourth Estate incorporates a discussion about the variables of what

is classified as “news” and how journalists determine what is in the public interest.

One of the concerns raised in debate about the crisis in journalism is that news

organisations allocate fewer resources to investigative, international and political

journalism than entertainment and sports news because the former does not generate

as much revenue as the latter. This section frames the ways in which newsrooms set

their agenda and begins to show how particular practices structure relationships

between journalists and civil society.

The review will frame the concept of democracy in the context of deliberation

occurring within the communicative spaces in society, with particular attention to the

institutions of journalism. To do this, it also briefly reviews the concept of the public

sphere, the communicative spaces comprised of a diversity of discursive interactions,

which fosters self-reflection and develops understanding of the matters affecting the

everyday life of citizens.

25

The review provides an analytical framework from which to consider the extent to

which traditional news organisations and new journalism oriented initiatives have,

thus far, used Internet technologies to develop and implement existing and new tools

and technologies of journalism in an effort to fulfil their role as the Fourth Estate.

Additionally, the research describes and analyses how traditional newsrooms have

incorporated interactive and participatory modes of practice and reviews a diversity

of views about how these impact on journalism’s role as society’s watchdog.

A preliminary review of the literature found a significant surge of optimism

throughout the world about the potential that Internet technologies offered for the

democratisation of journalism. This hopefulness, however, is tempered with equally

weighted concerns about the capacity for Internet use to fracture the interactivity and

deliberation between community members holding differing opinions (D. Adams,

2006). While the Internet is embraced for its potential to give everybody a voice,

some are concerned that the personalisation of information consumption enables

people to close themselves off from diverse or opposing viewpoints (Sunstein, 2004:

58). Furthermore, concerns are held for those who are excluded from public

conversations by their limited literacy skills and access to the technology hardware

and required to participate in the public debate online (Hargittai, 2009). Each of

these concerns will be further explained in Chapter 3.

Before the Internet, newsroom routines required reporters to work to strict print and

broadcast deadlines. Today, newsrooms using Web 2.0 technologies can file reports

online as events happen. In addition, methods for communicating with the public

have evolved from one-way modes on broadcast and print platforms to include

interactive and collaborative communication across multiple online platforms.

Interactions between journalists and the public now occur inside and outside of

traditional news sites, which include social media platforms. The creation of new

spaces within a diversity of online platforms allows news organisations greater scope

to reach societies’ diverse socio-economic and political demographic.

The tools of news gathering have expanded from the traditional paper-based

notepad, pen and voice recorder to include mobile phones, computers, video

26

cameras, digital still cameras, Internet connections and many different software

packages such as word processing, data analysis, audio, image and video editing

packages. These same tools allow news to be produced in multiple media formats,

including video, audio, graphics, still images, slide shows, and maps for their

organisations’ websites, and increasingly for external websites such as YouTube,

Tumblr, Facebook, Twitter, and blogs. These innovations offer a wide range of

citizens a far greater choice when accessing and engaging with content than was

possible using traditional print and broadcast platforms only.

While many journalists believe that the Internet has enhanced their ability to perform

the basic tasks of journalism, the new technologies used to produce, present and

distribute journalism are far more complex than those of the past. Moreover, given

that these tools and technologies are continuously evolving, the methods and practice

of journalism are in a constant state of flux. It is therefore crucial that journalists not

only keep abreast of the research skills necessary to access the precise information

needed from the diverse and wide range of available data, but that they also look for

more efficient ways to aggregate, filter and make sense of vast amounts of

information. This requirement has seen the evolution of the methods and processes

of networked journalism, which includes crowdsourced newsgathering and data

analysis.

While the tools and technologies of journalism have changed, the basic requirement

to provide authoritative and accurate writing remains the same (Bender, Davenport,

Drager, & Fedler, 2009: 5; Marsh, 2008). Like journalists in the Industrial Age,

contemporary journalists still need to be skilled in grammar, style, content creation,

and reporting to be accessible to the diverse demographic of the local, national and

global populations they serve. The need for skills to identify newsworthy stories,

write good leads, research back-stories and histories of issues and events, to write

concisely and ethically, to use critical thinking and attention to detail remain as

important as the new modes of networking, verification, and technological literacy.

The post-industrial age places much greater demands on journalists than ever before

to help people navigate their way through the busy information super-highway.

27

The ubiquitous use of Web 2.0 technologies has added new dimensions to the

theoretical perspectives of journalism and as such has created a diversity of

journalism entities. The traditional debates about the role of journalists have evolved

to include assertions and questions about: the significance of citizen reporters and

citizen produced content; the similarities and difference between professional and

non-professional reporters; and the value of publicly funded journalism compared to

commercially produced and pay-walled news. This review will create a framework

from which to understand these.

The Crisis in Journalism

There are a number of factors contributing to what is perceived to be “a crisis in

journalism” (Couldry, Livingstone, & Markham, 2010; Gitlin, 2009; D. Levy, 2011a,

2011b; McChesney, 2011; Thompson, 2011). The global economic crisis has caused

many businesses to cut costs, with the first cuts naturally hitting advertising budgets.

As a result, advertising revenues for print have collapsed, and online advertising is

also falling (Rosenstiel, 2009b). Compounding the economic crisis is the emergence

of new Web 2.0 technologies, which among other things have largely displaced

classified advertising from traditional print services and repositioned it in new online

formats such as Craigslist. This particular business trend means that advertisers do

not need the news to display and market their products anymore because the Internet

has offered them new ways to reach audiences (Osnos, 2009: 1; Rosenstiel, 2009a).

Given that the economic model of commercial journalism during most of the

twentieth century was based on advertisers reaching consumers (P. Meyer, 2003: 11;

Shirky, 2009), this loss of revenue has created a colossal financial burden for the

news media industry, and is ongoing.

All news media business models are, to various degrees, struggling, but the

newspaper/print industry is suffering the most. The cost of producing news underpins

many contentious debates about whether the industry ought to enforce subscription

fees, and while several organisations have already adopted this principle, there is

significant opposition to it. Although many print newspapers are in part subsidised

by a user-pay transaction, critics argue that given the important role of the press to

democracy, everyone should have equal access to the news regardless of their ability

to pay:

28

“Newspapers play a critical role in the provision of news. They

contribute heavily to the gathering and diffusion of local, regional or

international news (which are then often re-used on radio or TV). They

set the news agenda for a very long time and have a better track record of

covering public affairs than other media. The printed press is also the

main employer of journalists in most OECD countries” (S. Oh, 2010:

10).

More recently, The Right Honourable Lord Chief Justice Leveson said, “I know how

vital the press is – all of it – as the guardian of the interests of the public, as a critical

witness to events, as the standard bearer for those who have no one else to speak up

for them” (Leveson, 2012). In the interests of sustaining the press, the quest to find

new revenue streams for quality journalism has inspired a range of suggestions

including micropayments and, in the US, the prospect of seeking government and

philanthropic funding (Downie & Schudson, 2009).

The main problem facing organisations attempting to apply subscription fees to their

online product is that people are not willing to pay for content that they can get for

free elsewhere on the World Wide Web. Research shows that most people

overwhelmingly say they will not pay a subscription fee for online news, and in the

event that their favourite news site imposed a fee, most said they would simply move

to other non-subscription sites (Rosenstiel, 2010). Rosenstiel believes the only way a

payment system would work is if every news organisation did it. He points out that

while some niche and elite publications19 have experienced a degree of financial

success with payment systems, it is often still not enough to sustain the business.20

The New York Times, for example, continues to depend upon the financial support of

several philanthropists to stay in business (Bollinger, 2010), which generates yet

another debate. While Michael Schudson says this kind of public financing is a

popular solution for those who can manage to get it, it also raises concerns for the

notion of a free press (Downie & Schudson, 2009).21 There are further fears that, as

raised above, limited access to national news publications, such as the New York

Times and the Australian for example, may restrict their ability to fulfil their vital

civic responsibility (Rosenstiel, 2010).

29

Another trend impacting the news industry’s revenue stream is the aggregation of

content by website hosts, who generate their own advertising income by

appropriating professional journalism produced by traditional newsrooms.

Aggregators make money without incurring any production costs, since the

newsrooms from which the content is sourced pay these. Rosenstiel (2009a) says the

news industry will increasingly have to deal with the practices of the aggregators.

While there is no consensus on the idea of charging users for news, the industry

agrees that those who use content for their own financial gain should be paying a

license fee to the developers of that content (Sturm, 2009).

Cutbacks in the Newsroom

The global economic downturn, failing business models, and the increased flow of

information enabled by the Internet has forced many traditional news organisations,

print in particular, to undertake dramatic budget cuts. This had led to a loss of staff,

largely essential specialist reporting, and a collapse of news media share prices.

Newsroom closures and staff cuts have been most prevalent in the United States, the

United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Spain (S. Oh, 2010: 4). As of 2009, the US

news industry had reportedly lost twenty-five per cent of all journalists compared to

2001 numbers, with over 50,000 jobs lost in the print industry alone22 (Rosenstiel,

2009a, 2009b).

Contemporary newsrooms are largely under-resourced, meaning there is less scope

for the levels of in-depth investigations, “less foreign and national news, less space

devoted to science, the arts, features and a range of specialized subjects” (Rosenstiel,

2008) and less original reporting than was possible in the past. The industry is now

comprised of fewer journalists, mostly “younger, more tech-savvy… serving the

demands of both print and the web… less institutional memory, less knowledge of

the community… fewer editors to catch mistakes” (Edmonds, 2006), who are

required to do more work than their predecessors.

Instead of deploying most of their journalists to the field, many newsrooms have now

become more reliant upon news wire services. There is now less opportunity to

follow-up and expand on public interest issues and topics and, in the new highly

competitive 24-hour digital news cycle, journalists are required to file instantly. BBC

30

editor Kevin Marsh (2011) says “it is hard for journalists to have to file immediately;

editors and managers need to identify good stories and give them more time”.

The consequence of cutbacks is reduced quality—an “erosion of substance”

(Edmonds, 2006)—and reduced quantity of published content. The predicament in

which the news industry finds itself manifests as a public perception that professional

journalism sometimes appears to take a superficial approach to “monitoring the

powerful” (Gitlin, 2009) and that it fails to provide the kind of service expected by

the civic public. Rosenstiel (2009a) contends the problem is more acute at bigger

news publications than smaller ones. He says while the numbers of news workers

fall, “more of life occurs in shadows”.

Foreign Bureau Cutbacks

A 2008 study of 250 US newspapers concluded that foreign news was “‘rapidly

losing ground at rates greater than any other topic area’” (Osnos, 2009: 3).

Newspapers have been forced to cutback their foreign bureaus, and sometimes close

them down all together. Large organisations such as the Associated Press, Reuters

and Bloomberg continue to have large on-the-ground presences nearly everywhere in

the world (Osnos, 2009: 3), but now produce more than simply on-the-spot news

coverage, with many reporters filing “interpretive features that match the work

traditionally produced by newspaper correspondents” (Osnos, 2009: 3). The BBC,

too, has a global presence, but has a greater concentration of reporters in Africa and

Asia “where other broadcasters are sparse” (Osnos, 2009: 4).

However, the consequences of the cutbacks to international reporting to the “broader

craft of journalism and to the greater public good” (Osnos, 2009: 3) may not be as

calamitous as some might imagine. Richard Sambrook casts light on the positive

aspects of the current situation: “Many elements, like multimillion-dollar bureaux,

will not [survive]. But much will, and there will be innovation and new opportunities

to more than compensate for what is lost” (Sambrook, 2010: 97). He contends the

effects of Web 2.0 technologies and globalisation on international journalism are

intertwined and the impact is twofold. First, Internet technology has globalised news,

making it much more difficult for mass media to publish inaccurate and/or

incomplete reports about far away places without generating a flood of instant

31

responses providing real time accounts about what is really happening. And second,

with increased movement of people across borders, less of the news may be foreign

to more members of the news audience than was the case in the past (Sambrook,

2010: 47; 2011). In light of this, newsrooms increasingly treat news content

according to its relevance to the audience rather than the traditional geographical

local/foreign dichotomy (Professor R. Sambrook, personal communication,

September 25, 2013).

Sambrook says foreign correspondents used to be mostly “white, middle class males”

(Sambrook, 2011) who relied heavily on fixers23 and filed for two deadlines. Today

correspondents are freelance, local, speak the language of the area in which they are

based, and they work to multiple deadlines in multiple media formats. The advantage

of using local freelance correspondents is that their local knowledge provides richer

contextualisations of issues and events in the region, which reflects the diversity of

the world more accurately than was possible in the past. Digital tools and

technologies enable reporters from anywhere in the world including isolated areas to

provide the world with instant access to culturally specific information as it happens.

Sambrook says that this approach enables new services to cultivate information that

builds a “cultural bridge to the people they are reporting to” (Sambrook, 2011).

This section has shown where journalism sits within an industry that is suffering

extreme financial pressure, undergoing significant cultural change and facing

challenges in every aspect of practice. The following sections explain the civic

responsibilities of journalism in democracy.

What is journalism and what is it good for?

Many have theorised about what journalism is and why we need it (Bardoel &

Deuze, 2001: 14; Zelizer, 2004).24 Debates pre-dating the Internet saw journalism

defined as a trade or a profession, and broadly conceptualised as language, art,

culture, sociology, political science, science and history (Zelizer, 2004). The

emergence of the World Wide Web has created new tensions between ideas about

who is a journalist, and the cultural role of both journalism and the journalist in the

21st century (McNair, 2005: 27).

32

The normative view of journalism sees it function as a liberalist information service,

widely available to everyone, with the primary aim of existing as an essential

institution for a healthy democracy (Zelizer, 2004: 154). It is a system developed by

societies to provide members with information that enables them to protect their

personal and social interests, form communities, and to understand social norms

(Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2001: 10), and emerges in response to our intrinsic need to

know. People are constantly inspired by the “shared sense of discovery” (Kovach &

Rosenstiel, 2001: 9) derived from engagement with journalism, whether that is with

friends and family, or with “imagined communities” (B. Anderson, 1983). Similarly,

McQuail sees news media advance society and the principles of democracy as it

connects individuals in “a shared national, city and local experience” (McQuail,

2005: 52).

BBC editor Kevin Marsh says journalism is a very small, precise, socially and

culturally important, part of the information universe (Marsh, 2011). Guided and

regulated by specific standards and protocols that encourage legal and ethical

practice, journalism deals with “facts, statistics, and information about public life,

politics and services” (Rusbridger, 2009b: 20). In addition, it provides context and a

diversity of informed opinions (Osnos, 2009: 1). As a “craft of newsgathering”

(Osnos, 2009: 1), it sits at the centre of public life and political debate. It is

influential and has the capacity to shape debates, destabilise governments and create

change (McNair, 2005: 26), and therefore holds a central and critical role in

democratic societies (Rosenstiel, 2009a). It aims to maintain the accountability of

government, business and individuals who wish to be in power and who work in the

public interest (McChesney, 2011: 53; McChesney & Nichols, 2010: 164).

Journalism is about hard, truthful news stories that “can change society” (C.

Anderson, Bell, & Shirky, 2012: 3).

The ability to hold the powerful to account and to be a catalyst for social change is

the central pillar of journalism’s purpose, and is defined through its role as the

Fourth Estate. 25

33

“Media build democracy both when they cover the world… and when

they take up the cudgels of the Fourth Estate by questioning authorities’

framing of events” (Moeller, 2008: 185).

The principle of the Fourth Estate stems from the late eighteenth century26 when the

role and purpose of the news media in liberal democratic political systems (Dutton,

2009) was described as a “de facto but not official branch of government” (Hampton,

2009: 3). The adoption of this principle by the news media “contributed to the

establishment of journalism as a mainstream economic and political force” (Conboy,

2004: 119). Social and political recognition of journalism’s important status was

officially reflected when government introduced policy changes to ensure everyone

could afford to access the newspaper. These changes saw the relaxation of taxes on

knowledge, advertising, paper and publishing (Hampton, 2009: 4).

Fourth Estate theory postulates that news media hold certain responsibilities to its

publics/readers, which include remaining independent, to respect the truth, to serve

as a space for the deliberation of matters of public interest and to uphold the values

and principles of the profession. Journalism should function as an early warning or

“civic alarm” system that can anticipate problems and present them in ways that

allow citizens to study and debate them, “before they grow to crisis proportions”

(McChesney, 2011: 53; McChesney & Nichols, 2010: 164; Rosenstiel, 2009a). In

keeping with deliberative democratic ideals (described in a later section), news

media publications are expected to be a “critical uniting feature” (Rosenstiel, 2009a)

as they foster citizen engagement, and make complex social, political and economic

topics equally accessible to the demographically diverse sectors of society. And in its

role as a watchdog, news media ought to expose any instances of corruption and/or

failure by government to fulfil its obligations to citizens (Hampton, 2009: 4; Moeller,

2008: 185).

According to Moeller, one of the problems with this theory is that, in reality, most

commercial media outlets do not spend their days considering their role in

democracy “because it’s not a line item on a profit-and-loss statement” (Moeller,

2008: 180). But this is only one of three key pressure points on this theory. A

growing closeness of relations between government and news media, a concentration

34

of media ownership, and a reliance by media organisations on advertising as their

primary revenue stream (Hampton, 2009) pose significant challenges to the role of

journalism as the Fourth Estate. Where there is a distinct separation between

government and media, diverse competition, and multiple sources of revenue, then

the Fourth Estate can be better relied upon to produce unbiased information and fulfil

its watchdog role.

When Relations Between Journalism and Government Grow Too Close

Journalism’s greatest deference to authorities in the last decade was arguably its

failure to question the decision of US President, George W. Bush, to invade Iraq in

2003 (McQuail, 2005). At this time, adherence to one of journalism’s key concepts,

objectivity as an assurance of truth, fairness and balance, was seen to have failed.

“Most mainstream media outlets abdicated their independent role; they capitulated to

the White House demand that they fall in with the ‘patriotic’ message” (Moeller,

2008: 169).

Amy Goodman speaks directly to this problem as a flaw in journalism, and identifies

examples where journalists have refrained from questioning government authority

and from extracting the truth from the “propaganda” sometimes expressed by

governments (Goodman, 2010). 27 She makes specific reference to the campaign by

the US Secretary of State, Colonel Colin Powell, to generate support for the US

invasion of Iraq in 2003. As Powell pushed the idea that Iraq had the capacity to use

weapons of mass destruction on the world, Goodman said research28 showed that

only three of the four hundred sources used by broadcasters to talk about Powell’s

motivations for war were anti-war. Public opinion on this matter, according to

Goodman’s argument, was shaped by a small number of powerful entities. She

contends that this showed a failure by news media in its responsibility to uncover the

truth and to present it to the public (Goodman, 2010). The main problem here lies

with the unquestioning acceptance of those sources to which journalists traditionally

refer: government, business, non-government organisations and lobbyists. Each of

these groups has its own agenda in public matters, which creates a conflict of interest

and makes compliant journalists vulnerable to manipulation.

35

The action taken by the US government, based on support generated by untruths,

damaged many international relationships between the US and others, and the toll on

lives around the world has been enormous. Traditional news media has not emerged

unscathed from these events and the measure of credibility and trust in the media

held by audiences has been seriously undermined as a direct result of failures such as

this.

Goodman contends that although new media technologies have, to some extent,

“broken the sound barrier” (Goodman, 2010) that traditionally protected channels of

propaganda, traditional news media still has an ongoing responsibility to give voice

to mass movements responding to important political events. She criticises the US

news media for its failure to provide adequate and fair coverage of the nationwide

demonstrations following Powell’s announcement of the decision to go to war

(Goodman, 2010). Journalism, she argues, “should be the checks and balances of

those in power” (Goodman, 2010). Similarly, and more recently, Manuel Castells

criticised traditional news media’s coverage of the Occupy Wall Street movement,

saying that coverage was unprofessional and ideological as it falsified, dismissed and

ridiculed the movement (Castells, 2011).29 Moreover, he said this happens because

some media are “controlled by corporate ownership and frame the message

according to the interests of the owners” (Castells, 2011).

These examples emphasise the need for the profession of journalism to develop

better methods to “separate truth from lies” (McChesney, 2011: 54), especially

during times of war, economic crisis and communal discord. The coming chapters

will show that the availability of Web 2.0 publishing technologies to the general

community has had a positive impact on this problem.

Concentrated Ownership Of News Media Hinders The Public Interest

The second key pressure point on the Fourth Estate can manifest in places where

there is little diversity of media ownership, as is the case in Australia. Miller says

this kind of situation has the capacity to change the values, ideas and politics of a

country, and “perhaps even the national character” (Miller, 2002). Where there is

less diversity of information and viewpoints, press barons who generate high

circulations and enough revenue to gain a financial status are able to organise their

36

businesses un-beholden to politicians (Conboy, 2004: 109). More to the point, it

provides them with opportunities to use their business “as instruments of power

against the political parties” (Hampton, 2009: 6).

Conversely, the Guardian’s investigation30 and the subsequent government funded

Leveson Inquiry31 into what we now know to be unethical and illegal business

practices undertaken by some past and present News International (NI) employees

and the UK police, exemplifies the benefits of maintaining diverse media ownership.

Investigations conducted over a period of four years, have resulted in the closure of

one of NI’s most popular and long-standing publications, the News of the World, and

a number of arrests. The Leveson Inquiry was subsequently announced by the British

Prime Minister to examine the relationship between the press, politicians and the

police. This issue highlights what Hampton refers to as the paradoxical position of

the Fourth Estate as a watchdog of government and large corporations when the

news media is often, itself, part of a large corporation that has the capacity to affect

the way the world is organised (Hampton, 2009: 7).

One of the key questions arising from the Leveson Inquiry is “Who will guard the

guardians?” Hampton suggests members of the Fourth Estate need, also, to watch the

watchdogs (Hampton, 2009: 7), as the Guardian’s investigation into the social and

political dealings of News International has effectively done.

Public and Business Interests Ought Not Compete

The final key pressure point is the exclusive reliance by news organisations on

advertisers for revenue. This poses “several distinct threats” to the independence and

purpose of the Fourth Estate (Hampton, 2009: 7), placing journalists in a precarious

position that has the capacity to influence what is reported and how it is represented.

Parts of the news industry are accused of dumbing down or popularising news

content for the sole purpose of generating larger audiences. The risk with this

practice is that it depoliticises the news and alienates publics from matters that

require their attention. While liberal media theories see the role of journalism as

having an obligation to the interests of the people, Schechter (2005: 19) says some

will argue that for commercial organisations “profit making” supersedes that

obligation. Meyer expresses the same concern that political matters may take a back

37

seat to profit, however, he also warns where there is a connection between business

and political interests, the mass media can be used as a powerful “vehicle[s] of

explicit political messages” (T. Meyer & Hinchman, 2002).

Meyer and Hinchman (2002) believe that, with the exception of some prestigious

newspapers, big commercial media has marginalised political news coverage. There

is a strong feeling that journalists operating in commercial news media are

increasingly censored, the news is sanitised and important stories are simply ignored

in the name of profit (Schechter, 2005: 17). Moreover, Meyer and Hinchman suggest

“there is a certain type of journalist who has taken advantage of this culture of

commercial exploitation to fight his way to the top in private broadcast networks and

in the tabloids” (T. Meyer & Hinchman, 2002). Where this occurs, the journalist is

often focused on ratings and circulation figures rather than accurate, quality

journalism (T. Meyer & Hinchman, 2002).

What Should Be in the News, and what are the Variables of News

There are many views about what the news should be and who decides. For example,

Sally White broadly describes news as “contemporary information about changing

worlds” (White, 1996: 21). While news is a complex entity that has multiple

variables, the most common sense criterion of the value of news is whether it matters

to the receiver. Where some see its role as ideological and political, others describe

the world as being comprised of a diversity of interests and there is more for

journalism to consider than simply politics (J. Hamilton, 2004; McNair, 2000). In

this vein, it is argued that stories that aim to be more accessible to the general

audience can be “useful ways of framing genuine public issues” (Conboy, 2006).

One of the key skills of the journalist in both commercial and public media continues

to be to find innovative and interesting ways to contextualise and present the

information the public needs to know. Recent research by Stephen Harrington shows

that “newstainment” 32 —the hybridisation of news and entertainment—has

increasingly become a legitimate and valuable form of public knowledge production

(Harrington, 2007: 4; 2009: 25).

While Dahlgren (2001: 38) views the market and the public sphere as two distinct

spaces, he notes how increasingly difficult it has become to keep them separate. The

38

mass media contains information about world affairs (journalism) but is also a

primary channel through which the market operates. The convergence of these

entities, each with its own unique purpose and function, within one communication

framework, has created a clash of ideologies. Dahlgren further observes that “the

public space of the media is interwoven with private space”, which is exemplified by

the mass media’s consistent coverage of the private lives of celebrities and

politicians, and moral issues (P. Dahlgren, 2001: 38).

Merritt and McCombs encourage journalists to think of their role as being part of the

citizenry, rather than as a separate sector, to avoid alienating themselves from the

ordinary people with whom they attempt to communicate (McCombs, 1993: 92).

They ought to better consider the point of view of the questions they pose to the

audience, because these often tend to reflect their own ideological agenda and

usually only serve to generate “knee-jerk” responses (Merritt & McCombs, 2004:

100). While these authors acknowledge that this particular view is a generalisation,

and does not apply to every journalist, they continue to hold concerns that the

practices of a few have the capacity to lower the credibility of the entire profession

(Merritt & McCombs, 2004: 100). Mark Briggs argues that the decline of the

public’s trust in the news media and its disengagement with the political process

indicates a need for practical change, which involves recognising that the landscape

has changed, and using Web 2.0 in ways that make reporting more collaborative and

transparent (Briggs, 2007: 49; Irby & Bird, 2007: 10).

Deliberative Democracy

One of the concerns of democratic theory is the level of citizen participation in

public policy debates. The defining characteristic of citizenship in a democracy is the

freedom for citizens to engage with public affairs first through debate and

periodically via the ballot box. Gimmler contends democracy has two tracks: one

enacts the constitutional elements of society such as parliament and legal institutions,

and the other—the focus of this research—has “more direct communicative and

discursive foundations” (Gimmler, 2001: 24). She contends, like Jane Mansbridge,

that citizens attain a personal and collective identity through their engagement in

relationships with other individuals in “the public sphere of civil society” (Gimmler,

2001: 24; Mansbridge, 1999: 47).

39

Mansbridge’s argument for deliberative democracy is that the developmental stage of

shaping public policy dialogue in democratic societies ought to involve as many

participants as is possible to ensure the interests of a wide cross section of society are

included. A diversity of interests threaded throughout the public debate ensures

ongoing competition between ideas, and the news media, since it has the means to

reach multiple and diverse publics in disparate geographical locations, is one of the

key civic forums of political expression in democratic societies (Schudson, 2002). In

2009, Coleman and Blumler suggested that the use of Web 2.0 technologies to create

deliberative spaces had successfully resulted in dramatic increases in interest in

public policy debates across multiple participatory online environments (Coleman &

Blumler, 2009: 15), which include those of the news media.

Traditional print and broadcast environments posed a number of limitations on the

ways in which people could participate in the deliberative process. Tight broadcast

media schedules limited the time that could be allocated to political expression,

similarly limited space on the print platform. These limitations were often

detrimental to the public understanding of the complexities and/or truth of issues and

events (T. Meyer & Hinchman, 2002). The transition to Web-based platforms by

news media organisations has changed the way newsrooms engage citizens with a

range of public debates. It provides more scope for individuals, whether in local or

disparate geographical locations, to directly participate in the many discursive public

spheres of civil society (Gimmler, 2001).

The true value of a deliberative environment is its capacity for people to share

information and knowledge, which enhances the understanding of complex issues.

Using an array of digital technologies, journalists can provide greater depth, and

show the finer detail and peculiarities of issues and events, than was possible in the

past. Citizens are consistently invited by journalists to contribute information in areas

where, perhaps, they have first hand knowledge, experience, and expertise.

The public sphere serves as a space where individuals can express and evaluate their

personal viewpoints about the moral issues in everyday politics against other

information and knowledge. Moreover, it “encourages citizens to face up to their

actual problems by listening to one another’s moral claims” (Gutmann & Thompson,

40

1996: 16). Deliberation is seen as a transparent way of making decisions because all

viewpoints are publicly scrutinised under the same conditions (Held, 2006: 237).

The limitations of deliberative theory are associated with concepts of reasoning and

mutual cooperation. Deliberation assumes that people can always recognise that

where opinions emerge in opposition to the dominant culture, they ought still be

accepted as worthy of moral respect (Gutmann & Thompson, 1996: 3). While

Gutmann and Thompson favour the way deliberation encourages people to listen to

one another, realistically they recognise that citizens would only agree on everything

“if they were all living in an ideal society” (Gutmann & Thompson, 1996: 16) where

everyone had a comprehensive understanding of all of the topics in question. The

desired outcome of deliberation, though, is to help people gain knowledge and

understanding through dialogue with others (Gutmann & Thompson, 1996: 6).

Citizens find themselves in disagreement with one another over many moral issues in

all societies, but sometimes these stem from much more than simple

misunderstandings. At times, they are deeply rooted in serious issues that have been

cultivated and become entrenched in societies over centuries. These differences are

often extremely difficult to overcome, as is shown in the comment forum attached to

the BBC’s 2007 news coverage of the assassination of Pakistan’s Prime Minister,

Benazir Bhutto. The BBC comment forums will be discussed in greater depth in

Chapter 4, while Chapter 7 will provide an analysis of the BBC’s management of its

comment forums during this significant social and political event. This analysis will

illustrate the concerns about the limitations of deliberative theory raised by Gutmann

and Thompson (1996).

Public Sphere

An examination of the notion of a public sphere is critical to the study of democracy

and journalism in a civil society (L. Dahlgren, 2004: 2). Habermas has had a central

role in shaping the concept of the public sphere. His theory of the public sphere

stems from his concern for a healthy and lively democratic polity, one where

engagement, participation and deliberation on matters of public interest serves to

protect societies from political extremism. The original Habermasian public sphere

included spaces such as coffee houses, salons and literary journals, where citizens

41

could come together as equals to engage in rational discussion with each other on

matters of public interest. While the original principle/idea of the public sphere

advocated openness, inclusiveness and equality, in practice these spaces were largely

dominated by male, educated, wealthy property owners, with women, the poor and

the uneducated being excluded. In this model, the public debate focused on the issues

and interests of a small group rather than the broader community. This changed when

newspapers began mass circulation and when broadcast technologies gained the

capacity to affect public opinion on a grand scale. It changed further when the

emergence of the Internet, and the general use of its associated technologies by the

general population, created more opportunities for more individuals to participate in

the deliberation of public affairs.

A civil society depends on a plurality of spaces between citizens and the State where

opposing ideas are contested through debate. Journalism, when it is “open, free and

diverse” (McQuail, 2005: 183), has the capacity to build and broker interactions

between competing public spheres.

The public sphere may be defined as a communicative network with multiple,

diverse and overlapping spheres and hierarchies (McNair, 2006: 137). It is an

abstract space where people, motivated by the utilitarian ideal of the greater good,

come together to express and share beliefs, ideas and opinions in a forum of debate.

The public sphere is based on the concept of deliberation, so it is within the public

sphere that multiple and diverse identities are iteratively and collaboratively

expressed, tested, changed and reshaped (Born, 2006: 106).

The public sphere is widely theorised33 and much of the discussion is grounded in the

work of Jurgen Habermas (P. Dahlgren, 2001: 37). Habermas describes the public

sphere as “a domain of our social life in which such a thing as public opinion can be

formed” (Habermas, 1962, trans. 1989; McKee, 2005: 205). It is also described as

“the institutional space where political will formation takes place” (P. Dahlgren,

2001: 33). A key condition of the public sphere, however, is that it “must be

technically, economically, culturally, and linguistically” accessible to everyone in a

society (P. Dahlgren, 2001: 35-6). The idea that this condition is not met in its

entirety is one of the theories greatest limitations.

42

Habermasian theory was often criticized for its prescriptive requirement that

deliberative communication to be based on face-to-face interaction (Habermas, 1992:

416). However, in 2008 the theorist took account of the ways in which the use of the

Web had changed the structure of media communication. This led to a revised

perspective that describes the public sphere as being comprised of networks of

deliberative containers of political discourses, categorised as news journalism,

entertainment, education, talks and commentaries, and carried through key actors

such as politicians, journalists, lobbyists, advocates, experts, moral entrepreneurs and

intellectuals (Habermas, 2006: 415).

The role of the news media has become central to theories of the public sphere since

it is a primary site of dialogue on a diversity of information and opinions (Born,

2006: 106). Meyer defines the public sphere as a social space where citizens come

together, in either an active or passive capacity, in a “nexus of rational

communication” (T. Meyer & Hinchman, 2002: 125), and contends that the

deliberation that occurs in the public sphere has a significant effect on decisions

made at the ballot box. It is on this basis that Meyer’s argument that the notion of

public sphere is understood as an essential element of democracy is formed.

The essential element of the public sphere is discursive interaction between citizens

(P. Dahlgren, 2001: 36-41). One of the key responsibilities of media is to create a

space in which citizens can feel a sense of belonging and value. The news media

does this by constructing views and questions of and about a range of political issues.

However, this practice creates a lot of scholarly criticism and discussion about the

power of the news media to set the agenda. The problem with agenda setting that is

most commonly expressed is that perhaps, at times, it is exclusionary rather than

inclusive of the public, which is in opposition to the purpose of the public sphere.

McNair describes the public sphere as “the communicative institutions of society,

through which facts and opinions circulate and by means of which a common stock

of knowledge is built up as the basis for collective political action” (McNair, 2006:

136). He says the connection between the news media and the public sphere is in the

exchange of information between citizens and news organisations that enable citizens

43

to participate in political debates and processes that affect the way they live their

lives (McNair, 2006: 137)

Nina Eliasoph says people try to avoid thinking about politics entirely. Her

assertions, viewed from a sociological perspective, suggest that people are not

concerned with framing the social, political and economic circumstances of their

lives within the broader context of macro social issues. Instead, they prefer to

narrowly focus on individual social agency. Even then, when people are faced with a

sociological problem that directly impacts the lives of their family, they still avoid

thinking about the macro problem (Eliasoph, 1997: 605). Her research sought to

understand political engagement, disengagement, and grassroots social change. In

particular she was concerned with how people act when their assessment of their

own power to affect social change is low. She found that if people are to take any

kind of social action, it is more likely to happen over local problems rather than

global issues simply because most people feel they have less control over what

happens beyond their own geographical boundaries (Eliasoph, 1997: 607). She says

feelings of powerlessness are often at the root of people’s expressions of not caring

about politics and these feelings are further used to validate non-participation in

public debates (Eliasoph, 1997: 621). Eliasoph advises journalists and politicians

against taking “citizens’ expressions of apathy at their word” (Eliasoph, 1997: 640).

Dahlgren says that people do not have a basic concept of their role as citizens,

therefore they do not see the importance of the “larger democratic project” (P.

Dahlgren, 2001: 44). The crisis, according to Mosco (1997), is of “civic culture and

citizenship” (P. Dahlgren, 2001: 43).

Citizenship in the Context of News Media

Citizenship is characterised through individuals and their collective membership,

activity and interests in matters of governance in democratic societies. Benhabib

conceptualises citizenship as a construct in which citizens have mutual dependencies

and recognise each other’s right to speak and be heard (Benhabib, 2006: 78).

Individuals have rights as citizens to participate in the discursive deliberations that

support a democratic society. While there are many sites in democratic societies that

support democracy through the recognition of these rights, this thesis is concerned

44

with how online news media provides citizens with the civic support required to deal

with matters of governance.

Personal experiences and social institutions such as education, media, community

gatherings and so on, shape the social and political nature of individuals. It is within

such structures that individuals begin to align themselves with a political doctrine

that they believe provides the greatest benefits to themselves and their communities

(Coleman & Blumler, 2009: 3).

In his conceptualisation of citizenship, Alejandro (1993) draws on the principle of

moral autonomy, which argues that people are less concerned with developing

relationships for the purpose of fostering a strong political citizenry but are more

focused with protecting their own individualism.

Bennett too observes a serious decline in public engagement with conventional

politics, especially within the younger generations in many democracies throughout

the world, while at the same time the world is experiencing a healthy commitment to

community spirited acts that include volunteer work, involvement with non-

governmental organisations and environmental causes (W. Bennett, 2007: 1).

In light of these observations, he describes two models of citizenship: the “dutiful

citizen” and the “actualizing citizen” (W. Bennett, 2007: 5). The dutiful citizen is

characterised by an obligation to participate in government-centred activities, vote,

and rely on traditional mass media delivery systems and other one-way political

communication models. Conversely, the “actualizing citizen” is a self-motivated

activist and gatherer of information. This model of citizen is not reliant upon the one-

to-many communication models that are representative of many mass media models,

preferring instead to communicate via many-to-many interactive Internet

technologies (W. Bennett, 2007: 5).

This research does not seek to examine the reasons for the perceived disconnect

between citizens and politics, rather it is mostly concerned with the way news media

attempt to engage citizens with public affairs. In this light, the research draws from a

study undertaken by the UK government, The Audit of Political Engagement, which

45

investigated questions of whether citizens were satisfied that the quality and quantity

of information provided by the media sustained their interest in public affairs (Fox,

Gibbons, & Korris, 2010). The audit examined the various ways in which news

media provide, engage and involve citizens with the production, consumption and

distribution of information. Its findings showed a decline in the public’s interest in

politics however, the “notion that politics is ‘a waste of time’”(Fox et al., 2010: 84)

was rejected. Seventy per cent of online citizens said the Internet was an easy way to

become involved with civic life, yet only nine per cent reported that they had

“expressed their political opinions online” (Fox et al., 2010: 6). Sixty-three per cent

of people thought media had the most impact on peoples’ lives compared to only

seventeen per cent who thought the Prime Minister had more impact. Finally, only

2.2 per cent of the population believes that their involvement in political debates had

the potential to make a difference to political policy (Fox et al., 2010: 7).

A strong point of contention in the conceptualisation of citizens as political entities is

the idea of citizens as consumers. In the context of news journalism, this debate plays

out through concerns regarding what publics need to know versus what they want to

know. For example, news organisations such as News Limited use a consumer model

to engage publics, whereas the BBC uses a public interest model to engage citizens

with, for the most part, what it deems the public needs to know. The “need to know”

ethic is underpinned by Fourth Estate theory that holds power accountable and aims

to inform, educate and entertain the people, whereas the consumer model aims to

draw large audiences for advertisers.34 This research does not aim to discount one or

the other of these models but rather it seeks to explain the relevance of each model to

the concept of citizenship.

Nick Couldry explores the relationship between consumer and citizen and argues that

research cannot be framed into one of these concepts without taking into account the

other (Couldry, 2004: 23). A recurring criticism in traditional news media is one

where commercial interests take precedence over the social responsibilities of

journalism. However, this assertion assumes that one of these elements should take

precedence over the other and does not take account of the idea that consumption and

opinion formation are intertwined (Couldry, 2004: 22).

46

Couldry defines citizenship in terms of the connection between individuals and the

social capital and trust derived from such connections. He says although traditional

media has largely facilitated political and consumption connections, there is still the

need for more diverse and productive local networks to allow dispersed publics to

connect on a wide range of issues (Couldry, 2004: 24). He also says that the way

citizens engage with media is determined, in part, by the forms through which the

media use to reach them (Couldry et al., 2010: 195).

Organisations such as the BBC have recognised the value of interactive environments

such as comment forums, where the public can interact with one another and with

multiple news media formats. The problem that remains is whether citizens have

confidence in their own efficacy to register with policy makers. Morrisett argues

people will not invest the time in deliberation, or perhaps even in following the news,

unless they believe that some account of their commitment will be taken by

governments (Couldry et al., 2010: 192).

Change of Platform Change of Direction

Perspectives of the effects of the Web on the politics, technologies and tools of

journalism are multidimensional. It has to be stated from the outset, though, that

from whichever angle online journalism is viewed, its main role remains unchanged:

it still has to “facilitate debate, to constitute an adversary of entrenched power, to

create a transparent society, to air the public’s business, [and] to promote responsive

institutions” (Carey, 2000: 68).

In light of the transition of every aspect of journalism to the online environment,

Briggs has called for journalists to maximise their use of the wide range of

interactive technologies to enable them to learn more about the people they inform

(Briggs In Irby & Bird, 2007: 10). Couldry is optimistic of the possibility of the Web

to be used as a tool to challenge the concentration of power and to change the way

we understand media communication (Couldry, 2003: 140). Hampton, on the other

hand, contends that it is not a “foregone conclusion” (Hampton, 2009) that the use of

the Internet will ensure that news organisations are more likely to perform their

prescribed role as the Fourth Estate. McChesney says the Internet is leading a new

47

wave of a “more thoroughly commercialized and corporate-dominated press system”

(McChesney, 2000 In Carey (2000)).

In 2008, Philip Meyer expressed concern that the mainstream media had been

“painfully slow to keep up with the need for better and more skilful journalism” (P.

Meyer, 2008). With the increased flow of information on the Internet, the search for

authentic and valid sources has become much more complex, as has the evaluation of

content. In light of this, the need remains for centres of communication, namely

institutions of news gatherers and producers, to highlight what is important and

authentic, and to avoid a “scatter effect” (Couldry, 2003: 138). Meyer agrees, and

highlights the need for individuals and/or organisations we can trust to manage the

constant and overabundant flow of information. He says that although technology is

increasingly making some aspects of journalism harder to manage, he suggests that

the development of new approaches to Internet/computer based journalism may help

to improve its value and service (P. Meyer, 2008). Traditionally, journalists were

hunters and gatherers, but now they must evolve into trusted people who add value to

what they have gathered by organising it and making it useable. It is no longer

enough to simply report an event without contextualizing it, without the inclusion of

an enlightening story behind the structure. Reports require detail about the

significance of the event, the relationships, the history of what has come before (P.

Meyer, 2008).

Rosen identifies one of the problems arising from the constant and instant feed of

information and breaking news that flows through the major newsrooms as being

with editors who are more concerned with being first to break news, at the expense

of providing context. He also calls for less sensationalism and more explanation for

audiences clicking on reports with the expectation of finding relevant and useful

information. He believes news organisations would be better served by knowing

whether people understood news reports, rather than how many people clicked on the

links. He contends that reporters sometimes forget that not everyone is an expert,

which tends to leave the largest demographic, the layperson, with reports beyond

their intellectual capacity (Rosen, 2010a).

48

Rosen suggests that a Wikipedia type facility, hosted by news organisations, may be

a viable approach to ensuring all demographics have access to the background

knowledge required to understand the complexities of news content. While some

organisations such as the BBC provide topic pages for this purpose, Rosen questions

whether these go far enough. In the spirit of research and innovation, Rosen has

launched a project35 whereby people can ask questions about things they don’t

understand or things in the news that they need more information about. The

questions are answered in an audio broadcast on a news website36 by a journalist who

sources answers from experts in the relevant fields of enquiry (Rosen, 2010a).

McKee says the Internet has changed “the nature of the public sphere in Western

democracies” (McKee, 2005: 172). Given the capacity of the Web to cut across

geographical and cultural boundaries, it has the capacity to forge connections

between the diverse and culturally disparate views of the world. Publics using the

Internet have the opportunity to instantly access and interact with a variety of people,

information and opinion, thereby making individuals better informed across multiple

public spheres than ever before37 (McKee, 2005: 176).

Conclusion

This chapter has provided a theoretical framework from which to understand how the

migration of print and broadcast news production to online news environment has

transformed the capacity for commercial and public news media models to provide

the public with new participatory and deliberative spaces. It has reviewed the

literature relevant to the politics of journalism with an interdisciplinary review of

some of the key literature in the fields of journalism, democracy, the public sphere,

citizenship, and the impact of Web 2.0 technologies on journalism. Its exploration of

the interconnectedness of each of these constructs a framework from which to

understand the evolving challenges for journalism in a variety of organisational

settings and contemporary circumstances.

The review has situated journalism within an industry confronted with financial

pressure, and shows that it is currently adapting its business and practice to

significant cultural change affecting the distribution and consumption of journalism.

49

The review positions journalism as a participatory information service, which ought

to be equally accessible to everybody in democratic societies. A review of Fourth

Estate theory shows that 21st century journalism is required to serve as a space,

independent of government and business interests, for the public to freely engage in

deliberative discussions about matters of public interest. An examination of the

concept of a public sphere has shown that deliberative communication is not

confined to in-person communication, but can occur in virtual networks created and

hosted by news media institutions for the purpose of circulating knowledge as “a

basis for collective political action” (McNair, 2006: 136).

This review is grounded in the notion that debates about governance are largely

contested through news journalism, therefore online news media sites are considered

to be spaces that civically support democracy. The publication of policy debates on

issues such as healthcare, education, the environment and employment on online

news media sites allows citizens to interact instantly and directly with journalists and

other citizens, and indirectly with key political actors. The review shows it is

necessary for news media to provide citizens with open access to topical debates and

to enable matters of public policy to be addressed from a broad range of

perspectives.

The review has also presented different perspectives of what constitutes a citizen in

the context of news media. Drawing on the work of Benhabib (2006: 78) it

conceptualises citizenship as a construct in which citizens have a right to be heard.

However, it also highlights concerns that people are not likely to participate in public

debates unless they believe that they are being listened to, and that there is a

possibility that their contribution will make a difference to policy makers.

Finally, the review highlights some of the early observations of the effects of the

Internet on the politics, technologies and tools of journalism in preparation for

chapter 3, which reviews the elements that constitute the tools and technologies of

online journalism.

19 Some of the key publications include the New York Times, the The Times (London), and the Australian.

50

20 For example, while the recently defunct The Daily had 100,000 subscribers each paying $40 per year, it was not enough to come close to covering running costs of $500,000 per week http://daringfireball.net/2012/12/why_the_daily_failed. 21 The concept of bailing out the Fourth Estate in the US was rejected in favour of spending money to create jobs in all sectors of society, which would have a complementary flow-on effect on the news industry in terms of demand, access and affordability (Rosenstiel, 2009a). 22 See also ASNE census data showing total newsroom employment at daily newspapers in the US declined by 15,600 members between 2007–2012 http://asne.org/content.asp?pl=140&sl=129&contentid=129. See also projected job cuts across the BBC including BBC News to 2017 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-15186116. In 2013 the National Union of Journalists (NUJ) said “The BBC has already lost more than 7,000 jobs since 2004” http://www.nuj.org.uk/innerPagenuj.html?docid=2825&string=job%20loss (retrieved March 4, 2013). The Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) reported that “700 jobs” had gone from News Limited and Fairfax in Australia during a three month period in 2013 http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-04/news-limited-announces-more-jobs-cuts/4242820. In 2012 the Guardian announced it would implement a £7 m cut to its editorial budget http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/dec/13/guardian-journalists-ballot-industrial-action. 23 Fixers provide foreign reporters with local knowledge and contacts. They also arrange accommodation, transport, and help with language barriers. 24 See also for example, (Adam, 2001; Allan, 2006; Atton, 2003; Bardoel, 1996; Beckett, 2008; Bromley, 2005; Carey, 2000; Dahlgren & Sparks, 1992; de Burgh, 2003; Deuze, 2005; Flew, 2011; Gans, 2011; Gillmor, 2006; Hampton, 2009; Hartley, 2005; Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2001; McChesney, 2011; McNair, 1998; McQuail, 2005; P. Meyer, 1991; Mindich, 1998; Schudson, 2000; Schultz, 1998; Tapsall & Varley, 2001). 25 The Fourth Estate complements the three other estates: aristocracy, clergy and common people (Conboy, 2004: !09). 26 Martin Conboy says “the phrase seems to have been used for the first time in the House of Commons by Macauley who, in 1828, pointing to the press area of the House, referred to them as acting as the Fourth Estate of the realm” (Conboy, 2004: 109). 27 See also McQuail (2005), who extracts examples from the history of international conflict, which saw the news media mobilize mass support for war in 2003. 28 See (P. Meyer, 2003: 11-17). 29 See also Castells’ chapter Occupy Wall Street (Castells, 2012: 156–217). 30 The Guardian’s full investigation is available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/leveson-inquiry 31 The official site of the Leveson Inquiry: http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/ 32 The term “newstainment” used by Executive Producer, Sunrise, Adam Boland, describes an unorthodox form of news found in entertainment genres. It can also be defined as the hybridisation of news and entertainment. See (Harrington, 2007: 4) 33 Key theorists include Walter Lippman, Hannah Arendt, and John Dewey and Jurgen Habermas. 34 Martin Conboy contends “the abilities of journalism to act as a public investigator and a public watchdog may have been increasingly compromised by its commercial success but they [the political functions of journalism] remain an essential part of its public legitimacy” (Conboy, 2004: 127). 35 See Poynter: Explainthis.org and (Rendall & Broughel, 2003). 36 See questions for journalists at ExplainThis.org and responses at The Breakdown with Chris Hayes at http://www.thenation.com/doc/20100329/hayes_breakdown. 37 The limitations of the Web as a site of democratic citizenship are discussed in Chapter 3.

51

Chapter 3 The Web 2.0 News Environment

Tim O’Reilly popularised the term Web 2.0 as an attempt to comprehensively define

the differences between the static and interactive Web. Where Web 1.0 allowed users

to read, publish and click only, Web 2.0 described the more advanced sites that

allowed interactivity between Web users. This chapter will discuss journalism in the

ever-emerging online environment. While in 2001, Web 1.0 was shown to have

enhanced the practice of journalism, making journalists jobs easier and more

interesting (Middleberg & Ross, 2001: 4), by 2004, a whole range of tools and

technologies of Web 2.0 had begun to emerge which supported participatory and

collaborative platforms.38 This chapter will review the elements that comprise the

tools and technologies of journalism, including network theory, network journalism,

participation, crowdsourcing, user-generated content, blogs and social media.

The Internet is “the fastest-growing medium ever recorded” (Flew, 2005: 7) and,

increasingly for those with access, has become a part of everyday life. The use of the

Internet is seen as “underpinning the social and economic progressions of nation-

states throughout the first stages of the 21st century” (Selwyn, 2004: 342), with South

Korea, for example, being one of the key sites of progress. The rapid and

comprehensive uptake of the Internet by people throughout the Western world has

generated much description and analysis of the ways in which it is socially inclusive

and/or leaves the “have-nots” excluded or disconnected from society (Selwyn, 2004:

344). Some of the key discussion topics in the debates are concerned with the

democratisation effects of the Internet, impacted by inequality of access (which

includes access to hardware), media and technology literacy skills, assorted

communication skills (Hargittai, 2009), socio-economic status (Flew, 2007a: 915)

and social capital formation (Flew, 2005: 8).39 Castells and others contend that while

the Internet is an “extraordinary instrument for free communication” (Kreisler, 2001:

6), those without access are excluded from important cultural elements of society

(Andrés, Cuberes, Diouf, & Serebrisky, 2007: 2; Meikle, 2003). Multiple scholars

and policy makers around the world have addressed the issue of the digital divide as

a wide-ranging social problem (T. Meyer & Hinchman, 2002; Negroponte, 1995).

This thesis is only concerned with the problem of access in the context of citizens

52

gaining access to online news content and being able to use Web 2.0 technologies to

interact with the news production process.

Figure 3.1 shows the rate of Internet usage as percentage of population for Australia,

UK, US and South Korea for the period 2003–2012. It can be seen that, although

South Korea grew at a faster rate in earlier years as a result of government programs,

for each country the rate has flattened out around the early 80 per cent mark,

suggesting a saturation point is close to being reached.

Figure 3.1 reinforces the findings by the 2010 World Internet Project, which found

that even those countries with high levels of education and employment, long

histories of Internet use, and high rates of broadband installation exhibited a large

proportion of non-users. The most common reason given for non-use of the Internet

was “no interest/not useful” (Pierce, 2010: 2), with twenty per cent of this group

divulging that they believed that they simply did not have the skills to use the

Internet (Pierce, 2010: 2).

Figure 3.1. Internet Usage as percentage of population in Australia, United Kingdom, and South

Korea 2003–2012. Adapted from World Bank, World Development Indicators and Internet World

Stats. Retrieved from http://search.worldbank.org/data?qterm=internet%20access and

http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats3.htm.

53

In 1997, then The Times (London) editor Simon Jenkins40 asserted that the impact of

the Internet would be minimal: “the Internet will strut an hour upon the stage, and

take its place in the ranks of the lesser media” (Nicholas, 1998: 49). This comment

was representative of the views held by many commercial news organisations at that

time, none of which could foresee the eventual pervasiveness of the World Wide

Web. However, after varying degrees of resistance, much of the news industry began

to show signs that it was gradually adapting to the online environment. This followed

earlier concerns, held by the print industry in particular, that not only had there been

reductions in the number of people reading news print (Kohut, 2006: 19), but many

people had reduced their routine reliance on the entire traditional news industry as a

primary source of information. Such fears were refuted by Rosenstiel, who argued

that the crisis in the news industry was not rooted in a loss of audience, because

although newspaper circulations were in decline, online consumption was increasing,

and therefore the combined patronage meant traditional newsrooms maintained the

largest audience of any news production entity (Rosenstiel, 2009a). By 2009, all

news organisations, regardless of their business model, operated and competed in a

new global news environment (Rosenstiel, 2009b: 7). With the use of Web 2.0

technologies, news production had become decentralised, networked, more

interactive and open.

In 2002, Meyer and Hinchman held little doubt that the traditional media would

maintain its dominance in the public sphere, but expected its power to be noticeably

reduced by the democratisation of information production (T. Meyer & Hinchman,

2002). While Internet diffusion had not yet peaked in 2002, they expressed an

expectation that the Internet would be used as a networking tool to mobilise all kinds

of causes, and moreover, that the public would be able to bypass traditional news

media altogether while publicising their messages. Furthermore, they believed that

the capacity of the Internet to support multiple platforms for the publication of

original information on a diversity of topics from different points of view, in a

variety of formats, some of which may not be available in mainstream news media,

provided for a much more objective point of view on all things. They expected that

the technology would evolve to increase, not only the ability of news reporters to

electronically network for the purpose of accessing and reporting on a much broader

and diverse range of events, but everybody else’s opportunity to do the same. They

54

said increased access to more eyewitnesses and the capacity for more citizens to

produce news about their communities and the world at large would most likely be

very beneficial to society because it may encourage the mainstream news media to

be more transparent and reliable. Overall, they expected that content generated by

witnesses and citizens would serve to enhance or complement the information

provided by traditional news media (T. Meyer & Hinchman, 2002).

News networks that were traditionally dominated by large media organisations now

include many smaller news operations, which rise and fall according to popular

causes, issues and needs that arise in society. Smaller news media operations, such as

OhmyNews for example, largely consist of individuals who have gained access to the

news media network through Internet communication technologies for the purpose of

expressing values and interests that are not represented in traditional news

institutions (Castells, 2011). Castells contends that these operations, though small,

still have the capacity to influence the broader system even though the larger

traditional organisations have much more entrenched systems of support and power.

He contends, “wherever and whenever there is power, there is always counter-

power” (Castells, 2011) and institutions attempting to resist the information

technology network will inevitably undermine themselves (Castells, 2011).

The Web has created a space for all kinds of causes, such as anti-globalisation and

environmental activism. It enables groups to engage the general public with their

causes, to mobilise the public to participate in debates, and to attend events and

demonstrations to further the groups’ social and political agendas (Rovira, 2011).

Identity networks such as these have increased in popularity because they offer both

a wider scope of interests, and an alternative way for individuals to express their

viewpoint. Castells says many people in the world are troubled by the failure of their

democratically elected officials and some mainstream news media to represent their

views (Kreisler, 2001).

While the Internet has a significant track record for mobilising activism, Calhoun is

cautious about ideas that suggest the Internet is the solution to ensuring changes to

unpopular policies and circumstances of inequality. He points out that whatever

activists can do, those with more power and greater access to more resources can

55

also do, using the same tools, often on a much grander scale (Calhoun, 2004: 231-

241). This kind of interference to which Calhoun refers is not limited to authoritarian

regimes. For example, the Occupy protests in the US were undermined by

ideologically prejudiced representations made by the traditional news media in the

interests of its owners (Castells, 2011). Despite this challenge, Castells insists that

the Internet has “disintermediated” control of the ways in which information is

communicated. He says “people can connect with each other, diffuse their messages,

take photos and upload them to YouTube” (Castells, 2011), regardless of the controls

of the mass media.

Nerone observes a contradiction in the argument that individuals would be

empowered by Internet communication technologies to communicate their opinions

to a mass audience, given that they are for the most part seen to be politically

unmotivated.41 While he acknowledges the potential for people to harness the

participatory elements of the Internet, he says the act of switching on the television

and radio for information takes a lot less effort. In 1995 he anticipated that the value

of the Internet would be highest for those already inclined to search for information

(Nerone, 1995: 108), a belief that continues to generate support (Markham, 2010:

90).

Castells says people in different parts of the world have always, to varying degrees,

felt oppressed, exploited and humiliated without doing very much about it. He says,

from “a spark of indignation, which eventually transforms into rage, then to action;

individuals overcome their fears, then they act” (Castells, 2011). He contends the

Internet is used as a method of “engaging with others in togetherness. It gives people

a sense of yes we can do it” (Castells, 2011). The following discussion of OhmyNews

illustrates Castells’ position.

The Democratisation of Journalism: A Review of OhmyNews

OhmyNews was one of the first news organisations in the world to purposively use

Internet communication technologies as a “counter-power” (Castells, 2011) to

simultaneously challenge the politics 42 of the nation in which it resides, the

ideological orientation of traditional news media, and the politics of journalism, by

changing the way journalism was practiced. Founded in 1999 by Korean reporter and

56

political activist Oh Yeon-Ho, the online newspaper OhmyNews was conceived with

the original signature slogan “Every citizen is a reporter” (Min, 2008b).

The political history from which this model emerged involves a long period of

political instability, which includes a transition from autocratic to democratic rule,

and the uprisings of a tenacious labour movement. OhmyNews was one of the earliest

news publications to embrace the participatory and networked capacities of Web 2.0

technologies so it could fulfil the civic responsibilities associated with being an

integral part of the member of the Fourth Estate. It regarded itself as an independent

and alternative form of journalism, an unencumbered free press, which functioned in

response to the region’s politics, and therefore deemed itself to be a reputable

institution of journalism. Its efforts to democratise journalism in South Korea

impacted on the evolution of democracy in the region to the extent that it was

credited with having played a significant role in the election of Roh Moo Hyun as

President in 2003 (Gillmor, 2004; Kwak, 2011).

Although South Korea’s pro-democracy movement had been active in various forms

since the early 1970’s, as recently as the mid-1980’s there was still a question of

whether its politics would ever be free of “perpetual authoritarian rule” (Tiffen &

Kwak, 2005: 138). However, thirty years later, and in the wake of the 2003 election,

South Korea became known as one of “the most successful third-wave democracies

in Asia” (D. Shin & Chu, 2004: 2), with citizens able to vote for local and national

leaders in regular “free and competitive elections” (D. Shin & Chu, 2004: 2).

While its performance as an electoral democracy is consistent with that of liberal

democracies, concerns remain about the extent to which key liberal principles such

as freedom, equality, justice, rule of law, and the responsiveness of political leaders

and governmental officials to the mass citizenry, exist (D. Shin & Chu, 2004: 3).

Many citizens continue to see “residues of the authoritarian past” (D. Shin & Chu,

2004: 13) and while the South Korean Constitution protects freedom of speech, the

ability for citizens and journalists to enact this right continues to be limited (Khan,

2009: 2; D. Shin & Chu, 2004: 18). The expression of ideas, particularly critical or

aggressive reporting of government, continues to be restricted by the National

Security Act, which purportedly aims to protect the South from communist influence

57

from the North (D. Shin & Chu, 2004: 18). Journalists have expressed concerns that

“if they cross a line on a politically sensitive issue they could face harassment or

possible criminal charges” (Khan, 2009: 2). As recently as 2010, OhmyNews

founding editor Oh Yeon Ho told an international conference that the rule at that

time was even more conservative than it had been with previous governments, which

meant the need for news organisations to self-censor their reports remained (Y. Oh,

2010).

The general use43 of Web 2.0 technologies has provided greater scope for “reformist

citizens” (Bromley, 2007: 179) to more efficiently build a wider scaled alternative

public sphere than was possible in the past. Dr Oh Yeon-ho began his career as a

magazine reporter and became a reformist citizen when he grew dissatisfied with

news media coverage44 of important issues in South Korea. Motivated by his desire

for free press, social change and political stability, he devised a way to use Web 2.0

technologies to challenge the entrenched practice of censorship and create balance in

the field of news media by creating his own news media operation (Woo-Young,

2005: 400). He aimed to create a news service that reflected public opinion and

offered ordinary citizens the opportunity to generate, participate in, and report on

public debates. The publication was framed by the slogan, “every citizen is a

reporter” and promised to evaluate all content submitted to the organisation for

publication according to its quality and readability (Bentley, 2008).

From its earliest beginnings, the primary objective of OhmyNews was to emphasise

to society the social and political importance of journalism, particularly journalism

produced by ordinary citizens acting in the public interest (Y. Oh, 2010). Oh saw the

publication as a social and political instrument used by citizens for citizens and

believed it would encourage people to come together to create, shape and debate

social and political policy issues that impact on democratic values, freedoms and the

way people their lives (Y. Oh, 2010). Table 3.1 shows a summary of the aims and

objectives of OhmyNews.

58

Table 3.1

OhmyNews Aims and Objectives

Aims

Objectives

Maximise the scope of freedom of the press in South Korea.

Create an alternative online news media site. Create a space for professionally produced citizen journalism. Show the importance of citizen journalism to society.

Remove the traditional threshold to being a reporter.

Demolish barriers that separate media from citizens. Break down traditional formula for news articles.

To ensure continued citizen engagement with public affairs.

Encourage and support citizen participation.

Ensure a strong and ongoing commitment to democracy by citizens in South Korea.

Equip citizens with skills that enable active participation in public debate. Improve and promote digital literacy and journalism education in South Korea.

Draw the attention of the world to Korea, its citizens and OhmyNews.

Harness the collective intelligence of global netizens.

To ensure continued citizen support of OhmyNews.

Convert global customers into educated stakeholders.

Emphasise the social and political importance of journalism to society.

Create a blog to curate information that generates and develops knowledge about citizen journalism.

59

OhmyNews Communications Director Jean K. Min describes some of the ways

citizens could participate in the news process at OhmyNews:

• Writing News: citizens were encouraged to gather and write news articles.

• Editorialising: ordinary citizens provided analysis and opinion on news and

events.

• Contributing comments: People could express their viewpoints on published

news stories.

• Participation in message forums: The organisation encouraged people to form

opinions and arguments about topical issues and to participate in discussion

forums. The public was encouraged to develop its own rules and behaviour

protocols for participation (Min, 2008a; Woo-Young, 2005: 400).

• Collaboration and Crowdsourcing: Citizens were encouraged to bookmark

and share content, and to make contributions to crowdsourcing initiatives

(Min, 2008a).

Min described two versions of OhmyNews. The first, OhmyNews 1.0, created a more

conversational relationship between journalists and citizens, one that replaced the

traditional news as a lecture model, while version 2.0 harnessed “the collective

intelligence of Netizens on a global scale” (Min, 2005): 19). OhmyNews aimed to

provide citizens with more media space than traditional media had previously

afforded them. It provided unlimited web space to thousands of citizen reporters for a

mixture of both professional and amateur news content, with amateur articles

outweighing professional by 5–1 in terms of the daily number of published articles

(Min, 2008b).

Oh modified traditional news production practices to create new formats, which

aimed to increase transparency and enhance the human authenticity of stories (Y. Oh,

2010). Reports originated from a diversity of cultural and socio-economic

backgrounds including non-journalist professional (for instance doctors) and non-

journalist non-professional citizen reporters. Min said stories coming from non-

professional citizen journalists’ first hand experience were the most exciting because

they offered new and alternative perspectives on a broader range of issues, which

often challenged the status quo (Min, 2008b). Professionals, for the most part,

60

provided feature articles based on their own professional experience, for example a

doctor might write to share medical knowledge and experience with the public,

which Min says provided the community with practical information. Over time,

OhmyNews developed a stable of citizen reporters who regularly submitted news

articles, opinion pieces, analysis, media criticism, and feature articles on diverse

lifestyle topics such as restaurant reviews, cooking, serialised fiction, cycling and so

on. Gillmor says, “the melding of old and new [journalism practice] was extensive

(Gillmor, 2004).

One of the concerns about early independent media sites was that it was difficult to

read them. The varied quality of content submitted to the OhmyNews newsroom

meant it was necessary for its team of professional journalists and editors (described

by Min as “gatekeepers”) to screen and make editorial decisions for every article

submitted to the publication. Although the term “gatekeeping” was often applied as a

criticism of the editorial practices of traditional news media in comparative analyses

of traditional and independent online news, Min said nothing was published online

without first going through the OhmyNews “guerrilla desk” (Min, 2008a). The

editorial process at the guerrilla desk was in fact similar to that of the mainstream

news media in that copy editors made decisions about the kinds of content that was

deemed acceptable for publication on the website.

Min said that while the editing process at OhmyNews was “extensive” (Min, 2005:

19) it was also “flexible” (Min, 2008a) with editors making every effort to “preserve

and encourage the unique and raw style of citizen reports [while ensuring the]

editorial integrity and readability of published news articles” (J. K. Min, personal

communication, October 19, 2013). . He said “it has been a constant point of debate

among OhmyNews editors [whether] too much editorial intervention would

discourage or even depress creative and diverse styles in the news articles complied

by amateurs” (J. K. Min, personal communication, October 19, 2013).

One of the most common problems with journalism produced by the general public

was the verification of facts. OhmyNews editors performed random checks on the

originality of submitted articles and required contributors to sign a Citizen Reporter’s

Agreement that sought to protect not only the interests and reputation of the news

61

organisation but also “to protect citizen reporters from potential legal implications”

such as libel (J. K. Min, personal communication, October 19, 2013). Citizen

reporters were also required to disclose conflicts of interest and to take responsibility

for their own plagiarism and defamation charges should they arise. They were further

required to provide information about the story development and research process

with detail about the source of quotes and ideas (Thacker, 2006). Min said thirty per

cent of citizen-produced content was rejected every day (Min, 2008b).

Where works submitted for publication did not meet reasonable publishing

guidelines, editors took two approaches to maintaining the enthusiasm and

confidence of writers. Participants were encouraged to become regular informants

who provided OhmyNews with interesting leads and angles for new and existing

news issues and events. In some cases this allowed them to share by-lines with

professional reporters. Sometimes professional reporters were required to attend the

site of a story to assist individuals with their reporting tasks. OhmyNews also offered

special online tutorials and suggestions for newswriting in an effort to improve the

readability of its news site (Min, 2008b). Min said the organisation always had its

brand in mind and made every effort to preserve it.

Min says only 10–20 per cent of OhmyNews reporters resided outside of Korea (Min,

2008b). Most reports were about local rather than international issues and events,

however editors sometimes contacted internationally based citizen reporters to give

them assignments during specific events that occurred outside of Korea. For

example, citizen reporter and US resident Han Na-young received a request to gather

information about the Virginia Tech shooting in 2007. Upon arrival at Virginia Tech,

Han was uncertain about whether an OhmyNews reporter would be given the same

media privileges as professional news media, however she was admitted with general

media access rights after the presentation of OhmyNews identification, which

demonstrated that OhmyNews had international recognition as a news media

organisation and that the line between traditional and emerging media practices was

blurring. Min says “it is a great asset for OhmyNews to have citizen reporters outside

of Korea because we couldn’t get journalists all around the world” (Min, 2008b).

62

There was much debate and experimentation with the management of citizen

produced journalism/content at OhmyNews. Min said if OhmyNews raised the bar too

high on the quality of user-generated content expected from citizen reporters, then it

might be pushing people to practice as professional journalists when the core purpose

of OhmyNews is to produce journalism by ordinary citizens (Min, 2008b). So, he said

there had to be a balance. If the organisation wanted to produce a professional

publication that would sustain its business model and provide an innovative Korean

news service to national and global citizens then it ought not expect to publish

“extremely polished stories” (Min, 2008b). OhmyNews was a “pro-am news site”

(Min, 2008b) comprised of a “combination of raw content, some sincerity and proper

supervision, combined with daily news written by a professional journalist” (Min,

2008b).

Oh defined journalists as people who share news stories with others (Gillmor, 2004),

which means every citizen, regardless of status, with the passion to find out and write

about things that interest them, can participate in the news process.

He believed that qualities such as passion and commitment, often attributed to

professional reporters, are common to all humans. He reasoned that this meant every

citizen has the capacity to be a reporter (Y. Oh, 2010). However, he also pointed out

that not everyone has the skill to write a news report (Oh, 2006). Min said “it is one

thing to write a comment on someone else’s report, but it takes a more developed

skill to actually write a story” (Min 2008).

Min unequivocally asserted that the Internet had made a vast difference to citizen

engagement with public affairs in South Korea. He said it had changed the peoples’

way of life and behaviour and had created a more progressive society (Min, 2008b).

The use of Web 2.0 technologies by the general population opened new opportunities

for people to interact with each other. Internet communication motivates people to

pay more attention to their surroundings in search of stories to tell, especially when

they experience success and acceptance with their writing (Min, 2008b). The entire

process develops peoples’ capacity to apply critical thinking across a diversity of

topic areas. Min said people who write about politics, for example, will follow the

work and policies of their local candidate to inform and entertain their readers; he

63

said, “It is very good for democracy; it makes [people] more engaged in this great

country” (Min, 2008b). He said this was good for everyone, not just for OhmyNews.

Min said, “all news media can offer more diverse and rich content to readers by

tapping into the wealth of Netizens’ collective wisdom” (Min, 2005: 19). As such,

OhmyNews regularly asked the audience for ideas about interesting news topics.

The Role of OhmyNews in Social Movements

Since the 1990’s, citizen movements in South Korea have changed in nature and

cause. Castells says most social movements begin peacefully and it is only when a

force such as an authoritarian government, for instance, imposes restrictions on the

freedom of expression of the movement that the movement escalates to violence

(Castells, 2011). The years leading up to and including the 1980’s were characterised

by “violent protests against the authoritarian state” (K. Shin, 2006: 6) however, by

the 1990’s civil movements in South Korea had become more peaceful and revolved

around middle class concerns such as consumption, education, housing, the

environment, and gender equality (K. Shin, 2006: 6).

Peaceful candlelight vigils, the most popular form of protest in South Korea, have

added a new dimension to participation in political affairs in Korea. They have

become one of the key forces in the relationship between citizens, media and

government. Held after dark for specific occasions and in various circumstances, the

vigils are organised and attended by masses of people throughout South Korea to

memorialise the loss of life, to protest against the marginalisation of particular social

groups by the South Korean government and to respond to public affairs issues.

Specific examples include opposition to the government’s Beef Trade Agreement

with the US, support for the global political movement against the war in Iraq,

support for Tibetan human rights, and support for the Iranians who rejected the 2009

Iranian election results.

The vigils were sometimes webcast via citizen media organisations such as Afreeca,

Agora and OhmyNews. Traditional media’s failure to provide live coverage of the

vigils during a time when people were intensely interested to know what was

happening created an opportunity for OhmyNews to fill the gap. Webcasts and article

64

reportage of the vigils attracted audience numbers equal to those obtained by the “big

newspapers in Korea” (Grandas, 2008). As the demand for coverage of the vigils

increased, it became clear that this form of news coverage and political expression

resonated with South Korean audiences. The overwhelming success of the citizen

media broadcasts in capturing the attention of the public and stimulating interest in

the public affairs issues prompted traditional outlets such as SinsaIN to adopt the

practice of webcasting too, which subsequently generated increased traffic to its

website (Grandas, 2008). This indicates that there was indeed a gap in traditional

news media’s coverage of the issues and events. Either way, the idea that the public

prefer the rawness of new media content to the professionalism of traditional media

is rejected by the OhmyNews founder, who argued instead for healthy competition

and collaboration between all types of news media organisation (Grandas, 2008).

The efficacy of the Internet as a tool to mobilise citizen support became evident in

2002 following a tragic event in which two Korean schoolchildren were accidently

killed by the US military during a training exercise. When a US military inquiry

acquitted the defendants of all charges of negligent homicide, a Korean citizen

reporter used the online edition of OhmyNews to post a call for a public protest

against the decision. Following the publication of the news about the findings, the

ensuing protests quickly spread to seventeen cities in South Korea, which ultimately

had an enormous impact on the country’s Presidential Election held later that year.

While there was little coverage of the protests on traditional news media platforms,

there was extensive coverage by many participatory online channels of

communication, including OhmyNews, which played a critical role in facilitating

deliberative dialogue. Citizen generated reports and discussion forums expressing

anti-American sentiment mobilised mass citizen protests that continued throughout

the country for the duration of the Presidential campaign.

Woo-Young described the 2002 Candlelight vigils as the event that marked the

significance and power of citizen journalism in two ways. Online citizen journalism

generated publicity that mobilised mass participation, and, influenced the outcome of

an election. On this occasion, Presidential candidate, Roh Moo-Hyun was considered

to be less amenable to the US occupants than the incumbent President (Woo-Young,

2005: 400), therefore he drew stronger public support. This was championed as a

65

very significant milestone and as a positive effect of citizen reporting. Moreover, it

was without doubt one of the most significant moments in the history of OhmyNews

(Hauben, 2005).

OhmyNews online discussion forums played an integral role in the massive turnout to

candlelight vigils and in the mounting of support for the opposition candidate, Roh.

Woo-Young contends that the participatory and conversational structure of online

news effectively turned “the Internet newspaper into a means of social movement”

(Woo-Young, 2005: 400): 400). The space and technologies made available to

Korean community members by OhmyNews enabled free discussion of a diversity of

topics that fell outside the professional news agenda. These have equal importance to

the relevance and priority of community issues and to the topics raised by traditional

news media. Citizens were able to generate their own news ideas throughout the

participatory processes, which provided greater scope for the democratisation of

journalism than was possible before the emergence of the Internet.

Such events in South Korea clearly show the capacity for Internet communication

technologies to empower people to create new spaces to organise, express and

mediate political ideals. It supports ideas that news organisations that adopt a

participatory approach to the production and distribution of news not only have the

capacity to generate collective action by people critical of government policy, but

also that such organisations are essential journalistic information sharing systems.

While OhmyNews had proven itself to be groundbreaking in its approach to the

practice of news reporting, its business model could not ensure adequate financial

support for the production costs of quality and timely journalism. Faced with a debt

of five hundred million Won (approximately four hundred and fifty thousand

Australian dollars) in 2009, OhmyNews, like many news organisations, faced hefty

cutbacks to services and professional editorial staff (cloudatlas, 2009).

Oh’s efforts to emphasise the importance of citizen journalism to society took a new

direction in 2010 when curator-in-chief Joe McPherson announced that the original

English language citizen journalism site OhmyNews International was to be replaced

with a new blog format that would serve as a resource for citizen journalism

66

(McPherson, 2010). The blog now publishes news and commentary on citizen

journalism, rather than original citizen produced news. The blog is part of the

organisation’s effort to generate and develop new and existing knowledge about

citizen journalism.

The introductory blog post explains:

“OMNI is different from the original OhmyNews outfit by concentrating

more on commentary on citizen journalism and its role in democracy. We

source news from other established citizen journalism organisations, but

we will occasionally produce original stories” (McPherson, 2010).

The new approach aims to generate discussion about the skills and techniques

required to perform citizen journalism and comprises information about the politics

of journalism, which includes the state of the industry and the effects of change on

journalists. It also aims to equip citizen journalists with the skills necessary to work

as effectively as professional journalists. It describes the tools and technologies of

journalism and provides advice on how to use them. The site provides alerts for

regular employment opportunities and provides updates on how citizen journalists

affect the news culture (McPherson, 2010).

The OMNI site was refocused because it was a victim of its own success. By

accepting many reports from around the world on widely varying topics, consistency

and verification became increasingly more difficult for its overstretched resources.

Since fact checking was one of its core principles, this presented a problem that

could not be overcome (cloudatlas, 2010).

At the time of its inception, OhmyNews was unique for two reasons. Korea’s political

history shows its struggle from occupation to autocratic rule and then its gradual

transition to democracy. OhmyNews challenged traditional news media practices and

the political powers of Korean government and business. The flow of shared

information by many citizen journalists and the emergence of a diversity of

autonomous voices within the confines of OhmyNews web pages transcended across

multiple global demographics. Moreover, it provided a new model of open

67

information and knowledge development, which many sites throughout the world,

such as The Huffington Post, would build from.

The fundamental requirement of a democracy demands free flow of information

about political policies and the people who create them. Traditional journalism as the

Fourth Estate aims to find and present information to the public who, in turn, engage

in debates about matters that affect their way of life. OhmyNews used Internet

communication technologies to provide the citizens of South Korea with ongoing

opportunities to take an active and critical role in the political process.

Developments in Internet technology that have enabled the creation of new

journalistic spaces, such as OhmyNews, allow ordinary citizens, national and global,

the opportunity to enhance their human development through engagement with and

participation in public affairs. This discussion of OhmyNews, a participatory space,

shows some of the ways in which the use of Internet communication technologies

have made a difference to the human development, freedom and security of South

Korean citizens. Given the long history of autocratic rule and the ongoing challenges

to the evolving democracy in South Korea, OhmyNews generated multiple methods

and channels of open communication between citizens.

Limitations of the Web as a Site of Democratic Citizenship

The discussion so far has shown that the perceived benefits of the World Wide Web

for democracy include its capacity to facilitate interactive communication by the

general population; its enabling of the creation and distribution of information on all

kinds of topics by any individual to instantly reach dispersed geographical locations;

its impact on the collapse of the gatekeeping role of institutions of political power,

including traditional news media, thereby increasing the capacity for ordinary

citizens to become watchdogs of the powerful; and the mobilisation of movements

and social change. These benefits—sometimes referred to as optimistic (Benkler,

2006: 233) and cyberutopianism (D. Hunter, 2006)—form the basis of arguments

supporting the notion of the WWW as a democratising mechanism.

Opposing arguments by the “cyberskeptics” (D. Hunter, 2006) are as varied and

critical as the optimists are of society’s institutional status quo. Their first concern is

68

that the increased flow of information has made it more difficult for people to sift

through the “unmanageable din” to find the information they need (Benkler, 2006:

234). A further consequence of this is the shift of the public conversation from a few

traditional news media sites to include a wide range of independent online

environments, thereby causing the conversation to become unruly and fragmented. It

is on this premise that Cass Sunstein has said that although the Internet’s capacity to

provide faster and greater access to information was “a wonderful development” for

democracy, uncritical approval of Web 2.0 technologies ought to be tempered by its

limitations (Sunstein, 2001a).

Sunstein argues that the fragmentation of the public debate, combined with the use of

Web 2.0 tools that enable individuals to personalise the kind of information they

consume, has the capacity to limit the amount of exposure people have to a diversity

of topics and points of view. Accordingly, this may cause the conversation to

become polarised and lead to extremism. Sunstein places great importance on

ensuring people are exposed to “unanticipated encounters” (Sunstein, 2001a), which

provide them with an awareness of the social problems that exist beyond their

immediate community. However, lawyer Alex Macgillivray disagrees with the idea

that the conversation has become polarised, saying, “[t]hat takes a dim view of

humanity,” and, “[w]e’ve always wanted to hear opinions that are not our own and

that’s why we talk to other people” (J. Roberts, 2012).

In 2011 Pariser identified a more complex version of this problem, which he

describes as a shift in the flows of information online, which is even more troubling

to the notion of the Internet as democratiser (TED, 2011). Explaining the problem as

an “invisible algorithmic” editing of the Web, Pariser says social media sites such as

Facebook and search engines such as Google are using algorithms to personalise the

content that flows to individuals. He determines that with the increased incidence of

these kinds of practices by some of the key information sites, including news

organisations such as the New York Times, the Internet can been seen to be providing

individuals with the information they want, but not necessarily with the information

they need (TED, 2011).

69

Graeme Turner, too, cautions those “jump[ing] to the conclusion that a widening of

access necessarily carries with it a democratic politics” (G. Turner, 2010: 2). His

reservations about the notion of the Internet as an intrinsically democratising

mechanism hold similarities to those of Sunstein. He argues that blog sites, for

example, are not innately progressive or liberal, as suggested by the Internet

optimists, simply because they operate independent of traditional news media. He

contends that while there is much opportunity for bloggers to express both normative

and alternative liberal perspectives, there is equal opportunity to publish extremist

views. He too argues that the increased volume of journalism enabled by the general

use of Web 2.0 publishing tools does not create a more open and reliable public

debate, nor does it provide the public with a greater diversity of opinion.

Benkler describes yet another perspective, pointing out that even though the online

environment contains multiple sites carrying a diversity of information, some

independent sites have generated a greater following than many of the others, which,

realistically, is not dissimilar to the mass media model of communication where most

people listen to a “central set of speakers” (Benkler, 2006: 235). This view reinforces

traditional news media as the primary source of trusted information, and argues

“[i]ndividuals and collections of volunteers talking to each other may be nice, but

they cannot seriously replace well-funded, economically and politically powerful

media” (Benkler, 2006: 236). Benkler’s own argument is that the online-networked

public sphere is neither too concentrated nor chaotic (Benkler, 2006: 239). Instead,

he says it provides a better structure for individuals to participate in the public debate

than was the case when the lecture model45 of mass media dominated the flow of

information (Benkler, 2006: 272).

Turner argues that the cultural shift brought about by the generalised use of the

WWW has increased commercial competition for attention, created even closer ties

between big business and commercial news media organisations than before, and

increased the integration of public relations with journalism, all of which have had a

far-reaching impact on the topics shaping the public sphere (G. Turner, 2010: 73). He

contends each phenomenon has created an interruption to the traditional connection

between established commercial news media and the community. Turner says trust,

70

which was traditionally built on the journalistic value of independence, is being

broken and the news media’s watchdog role is eroding.

For the cyberutopians, this ought not be a concern because their view is that open

access to the tools and technologies of journalism means any individual can pick-up

the batton dropped by the news media and perform the watchdog role themselves.

However, Benkler believes “individuals, no matter how good their tools, cannot be a

serious alternative to a well-funded, independent press that can pay investigative

reports, [and] defend lawsuits” (Benkler, 2006: 261) to the degree and with the

effectiveness that traditional news media can. 46 At the same time he places great

value on collaborations between members of the public and professional journalism

on matters of public importance, a phenomena that he defines overall as the

“networked information economy” (Benkler, 2006: 265). It is in this vein that

Benkler argues that the Internet democratises (Benkler, 2006: 272).

Turner’s view contrasts with Singer’s research findings that Guardian journalists

consider their online platforms to be a “healthy democratization of the media

conversation” (Singer, 2011: 125), largely because they believe it provides audiences

with a greater diversity of opinion than was possible in traditional print platforms.

However, like Turner she too finds a variety of problems arising as journalists

attempt to maintain order in the chaos of comment and opinion, all of which has the

capacity to have a detrimental impact on the relationship between professional

journalists and the public.

Putnam believes the Internet threatens interpersonal communication, which he argues

is an important element of social interaction because it creates “meaningful

community” (Putnam, 2000: 177). He places much weight on the importance of

“geographically local networks, face to face contact and trust” (Putnam, 2000: 177)

to the formation of social capital. For Putnam, participation in the virtual world is

merely a “casual activity”, therefore it largely erodes the key qualities of social

capital, including commitment, trust and reciprocity. While Meyer and Hinchman

(2002) primarily agree with this view, they differentiate on the idea of place-based

communication. They suggest that the many ways in which the Internet enables

people of all political persuasions to connect far outweighs its potential impact on the

71

need for physical presence. Benkler provides a similar critique of Putnam’s work,

arguing that online communication would need to “supplant real-world human

interactions, rather than to simply supplement them” (Benkler, 2006: 362).

Moreover, he says the kind of argument put forward by Putnam suggests that the

social condition of individuals is static, therefore ought not evolve with the world

around them (Benkler, 2006: 362), which is clearly untrue.

Barry Wellman’s work contrasts with Putnum’s, since he sees Internet

communication technologies as a way to increase rather than reduce social capital

and civic engagement, and argues that the modern social world is located in many

different community networks rather than one geographic community as described

by Putnam. He says the Internet is better able to develop social capital largely

because it is not inhibited by geographical locations, therefore people are free to

communicate and develop connections with others anywhere in the world (Wellman,

2001: 2031–2034).

Markham’s thesis is in agreement with those arguing that the democratising potential

of the online environment has been overstated (Markham, 2010: 77). In particular, he

argues that the deprofessionalisation of traditional news media structures, caused by

the uptake of media production by the general population, will not necessarily lead to

a democratisation of political structures. He specifically argues that while the

exchange of information within interactive online environments such as blogs may

appear to generate a sense of democratisation, this cannot be considered as relevant

unless it transforms to “some form of action, deliberation or contestation outside the

confines of this particular arena of cultural production” (Markham, 2010: 90).

Moreover, he says that where online interactivity does in fact lead to activity in the

urban space, it involves only those who are already politically motivated47 and does

not usually engage people who are politically disenfranchised for one reason or

another48 (Markham, 2010: 90). In summary, Markham says a shift in power, caused

by use of Web 2.0 technologies by the general population, does not “inevitably

change” the game itself (Markham, 2010: 91).

Castells takes yet another view of the democratising capacity of the Internet, which is

useful when considering the ideas being expressed here, especially notions that the

72

use of Web 2.0 technologies undermines the incidence of place-based

communication and that it is not inevitable that the game (social world) itself will

change. He proffers that the Internet is a network of hybrid spaces comprised of

cyber and urban environments, used autonomously to connect individuals with each

other. He says cyberspace connections flow into the urban space, which becomes

occupied by a particular cause or social movement (Castells, 2011). He argues that

the use of Web 2.0 technologies by members of the general public have altered the

mobilisation of protest movements forever. His research finds that the juncture where

urban and cyberspace connect is where the most interesting view of the mobilisation

of political movements occurs. He says political movements are “always born in the

Internet” (Oltermann, Strauss, & Maynard, 2012) where they have the autonomy to

construct themselves through debate, however they quickly move to the urban space

where physical social networks are also created. He denotes that these movements

are currently in an “embryonic state” and therefore there is a lack of evidence to

suggest that they have impacted on public policy so far, however he believes there is

a distinct possibility that what we are witnessing now, with the many Occupy

movements for example, is the beginning of a mobilisation process (Oltermann et al.,

2012). He draws this conclusion from the fact that there are increasing numbers of

new forms of political expression emerging around many election campaigns, all of

which indicate that there is a growing discontent with many current political systems

(Oltermann et al., 2012). Castells contends that people’s awareness is enhanced by

online communication and they are empowered by it, even though they know they

cannot change things in the short term.

In a similar vein to Castells, Yochai Benkler approaches the Web 2.0 environment

with optimism about the possibilities for the mobilisation of action, and more

opportunities for participation in the social world. Benkler’s work focuses on the

digital economy. Its relevance to this research is important because it is in part

concerned with the shift away from the one-way model of news communication,

which was comprised of “capital-intensive commercial and professional producers to

passive, undifferentiated consumers” (Benkler, 2006: 29) and the removal of

geographical boundaries that impeded the cost and speed of the distribution of

information, to “peer production” (Benkler, 2006: 59). In terms of the Internet’s

democratisation qualities, Benkler says that he does not anticipate a global

73

democratisation, however, he argues the “emergence of the networked information

economy” of the Internet means it makes “the work of authoritarian regimes harder”

(Benkler, 2006: 271) and it “offers a genuine reorganization of the public sphere”

(Benkler, 2006: 465), reducing the capacity for news media owners to manipulate

public opinion without interference. Moreover, he argues that the Internet enabled

networked public sphere “provides an avenue for substantially more diverse and

politically mobilized communication than was feasible in a commercial mass media

with a small number of speakers and a vast number of passive recipients (Benkler,

2006: 465). Benkler observes an increasing incidence of “nonmarket, distributed, and

collaborative investigative journalism, critical commentary, and platforms for

political mobilization and organization” (Benkler, 2006: 465) all of which appear to

indicate shift toward a democratisation of journalism.

Networked Journalism

Van Dijck contends that the Internet has become part of the cache of technologies

supporting the power relations that shape the “political, economic and social forces”

of society (Van Dijck, 2011: 344). Castells says its inclusion has reduced if not

removed the middleperson from the communication process, which means

individuals now have a significant amount of autonomy over the diffusion of their

messages, and they ways in which their lives are represented and reflected in public

spheres (Castells, 2011). Web 2.0 technologies enable people to more easily

construct an “alternative society” (Brown, 2012; Castells, 2010; Van Dijck, 2011:

344) comprised of many social movements49 that aim to change particular values of

society. This denotes a significant cultural change to the way people interact with

each other and with the news media.

As traditional news media transitioned online, it had a choice to make, to either

reshape its own role by engaging with this phenomenon, and to reflect the diversity

of interests and values of the many nodes in the networks thereby becoming an

intrinsic and trusted part of the network, or to attempt to retain its former power over

the message by ignoring it or undermining it. For some organisations this has been a

difficult decision, with a few opting to cling to the industrial model of media, the

former power it provided, and a lesser-challenged capacity to shape certain

institutions of society with their own values. The latter decision may well be fruitless

74

given, as Benkler points out, that “many hundreds of millions of users around the

globe” now have the capacity to use the networked economy to bypass the industrial

models of media, enabling them to connect with and widely distribute information to

anyone, thereby making it much more difficult for the industrial model to maintain a

demand for its product (Benkler, 2006: 32).

In 2001, Bardoel and Deuze described network journalism as comprising of

“convergence, interactivity, customisation of content and hypertextuality”. They said

it manifests as “the convergence between the core competences and functions of

journalists and the civic potential of online journalism” (Bardoel & Deuze, 2001: 2).

Emphasising the point that the notion of network journalism does not indicate a

change to the core competencies of journalism, they suggest there is, however, a

greater need for journalists to innovate and develop new technologies of journalism

that will enable them to filter the high volumes of information for what the public

needs to know (Bardoel & Deuze, 2001: 14).

Charlie Beckett describes networked journalism as “a synthesis of traditional

journalism and the emerging forms of participatory media enabled by Web 2.0

technologies such as mobile phones, email, websites, blogs, micro-blogging and

social networks” (Beckett, 2010: 1). His thesis suggests that networked journalism

has the capacity to uncover and challenge things, ordinarily hard to see, that may

lead to improvements in the social world. Similarly to Castells, he says for

journalism to become more grounded in people’s lives, power must shift “from the

newsroom to the connected online and digital world” (Beckett, 2008b, 2012). In

doing so, journalism becomes better equipped to develop partnerships with

alternative and independent organisations such as WikiLeaks, which aim to monitor

and gain access to the activities and business of the powerful (Beckett, 2012).

Jarvis too favours a more collaborative and participatory approach to the production

of news because he says it enables the news media to become more transparent and

therefore trustworthy, and it is a more dynamic approach to journalism than the

traditional lecture model. He thinks the news day should begin with the reporter

disclosing the topic of his or her investigation to the public with the key objective

being to gather crowd-sourced responses. The reporter would then post the gathered

75

information online with questions about, ‘What is right?’, ‘What is wrong?’, and

‘What else do you know?’ (Jarvis, 2010). This approach to journalism is underpinned

with a presumption that the crowd is wise (Howe, 2006) and perhaps knows more

than the news organisation. Jarvis believes that since the news process begins with

the public then the news media ought to listen to individuals (Jarvis, 2010).

The Tools and Technologies of Networked Journalism

The tools of networked journalism are a combination of traditional and digital

technologies, which also include social media and blogging platforms. The

technologies of networked journalism include crowdsourcing and collaboration

between professional, independent and citizen sources of news information. The

politics of networked journalism are concerned with the ways in which the values

and principles of journalism are enacted throughout its collaborative endeavours and

how this now socially enhanced practice of journalism, impacts on the broader

politics of journalism, incorporating agenda setting, investigative and international

journalism, principles such as objectivity, verification, transparency and trust, and

business models.

While the Internet has stimulated innovative developments in the production,

distribution and consumption practices of journalism, it has also increased access to

many more sources of information and has increased the layers of data available for

analysis. While journalists have always consulted with multiple sources and trusted

networks, analysed complex data, and produced stories to contextualise their

findings, the main difference in the digital environment is the increased availability

of tools and technologies that enable much more complex operations with greater

volumes of data. While this is overwhelmingly good news for journalism, the

problem is finding the resources—human, time, skills and revenue—required to

innovatively complement the traditional tools and technologies of journalism (S. Oh,

2010: 7; Oliver, 2011). This involves identifying legitimate needs and uses rather

than using technology simply for the sake of using it (Bell, 2011).

The methods of news production and ways to generate information flows in

contemporary journalism include the use of hardware such as: computers and mobile

communication technologies (smart phones, iPads and other tablets); software

76

including email, blog platforms and public comment forums; social media sites such

as Facebook, YouTube and Twitter; search engines such as Google; blog lists such as

Google Blogs and Technorati; video streaming sites such as Bambuser and

Livestream; photo sharing sites such as Flickr; data analysis tools such as Shapefile;

mapping tools such as Google Maps; and social bookmarking tools such as

Delicious. While reporters continue to meet contacts in person, they can now also

use messaging services such as Skype to conduct interviews. In addition to

traditional channels of communication such as landline telephones and broadcast

phone-ins, news websites and social networks are used as complimentary and

sometimes replacement methods for crowdsourcing information. Online news stories

have, themselves, become tools that generate additional information. This happens in

a number of ways, for example, through the interactive comment sections included at

the bottom of online news stories, responses to journalists’ calls for content,

crowdsourced data analysis and email. Some journalists also use personal blogs,

video logs, online polls, surveys, message boards and forums to generate new

information and leads. Contacts and information can now be stored in electronic

databases. 50

Participation in Digital Environments

A 2010 study Digital Citizens and Democratic Participation (Williamson, 2010: 15)

surveyed 2003 online users in the UK and found that that the Web is generally

perceived as a valuable space for those who wish to engage with public affairs.

Seventy per cent of the study’s participants feel that it is much easier to participate in

the public debate now than it was before the availability of Web 2.0 technologies.

They expressed a preference for interactive engagement with public debates over the

one-to-many broadcast model that dominated media communication practices in the

past. Most believe that the interactive qualities of Internet technologies provide them

with more opportunity to “track and contribute to the democratic debate”

(Williamson, 2010: 15). Sixty-four per cent of participants felt confident to use the

online environment, however fewer people said they were self-confident enough to

leave comments on blogs, or set up their own blog. Only forty-eight per cent said

they could perform participatory tasks with confidence, while fifteen per cent said

they were not confident enough to participate online at all. Thirty-seven per cent said

they were not interested enough to become involved in online discursive networks.

77

Overall, the study found people believe the Internet has made it easier for those

already interested in public debates to participate in political activities both online

and offline (Williamson, 2010: 6). This finding is consistent with Nerone’s analysis

of public participation and deliberation, fifteen years earlier (Nerone, 1995: 108).

News organisations have always allocated space to citizen participation. But before

the news media’s transition to online news environments, the public could only

participate in radio talkback and contribute letters to the editor in print publications

and current affairs television programs. Each of these imposes limitations on the

number and quality of contributions that can ever be heard in the public domain en

masse. Newspapers are limited by column space, and television and radio broadcasts

are limited by the availability of airtime, and all are constrained by editorial values.

Only a very small number of people can access these spaces, therefore the ability for

organisations to host large-scale participation and interaction through these channels

is minimised. McNair describes the public’s involvement in the journalism process

during this period as “…no more than a recipient of information” (McNair, 2000:

105).

The use of Web 2.0 technologies by the news media has created a range of

opportunities for ordinary citizens to “join with journalists in the interrogation of

political rhetoric” (McNair, 2000: 106). The public now has the capacity to create,

contribute to and challenge the social and political narratives expressed in the

traditional news media space, on a very large scale.

The following sections will review the notion of participatory engagement as having

two dimensions: the networked individual and networked collective intelligence.

Individual participation occurs on numerous social media platforms including news

blogs on news media websites. Many news sites, including the BBC, News Limited

websites such as the Australian, the Herald Sun, and News International publications

such as the Wall Street Journal, invite the public to comment on blog posts written

by professional journalists. In the spirit of community, individuals also use a range of

Web 2.0 devices to provide the news media with tips and information about public

issues and events.

78

Blogs: The Noisy All-rounders

Blogs were the first shift away from the one-to-many model of news distribution

(Gillmor, 2009: 2) since they enable anyone to tell a story on a topic of their choice

for instant distribution to an unlimited number of people anywhere in the world. The

main characteristics of a blog include “personal editorship by the owner/creator, the

inclusion of hyperlinks, regular updates, free public access and maintenance of a

postings archive” (Campbell, Gibson, Gunter, & Touri, 2010: 30). Blogs typically

include a comment forum where users can interact with the blogger and other users.

The interactive nature of the comment forum is an important quality of the format,

and as such blogs are described as conversational51 (G. Reynolds & Lenhart, 2006).

The notion of the blog as a conversation is further supported by the capacity that

allows any number of weblogs to link to each other, thereby increasing the breadth of

the conversation. The measure of a blog’s popularity is gauged by how many blogs

link to it (Mortensen & Walker, 2002: 271) and how many people read it.

Blog posts have their greatest impact in conversations about topics that people would

not ordinarily find in the traditional news media streams (G. Reynolds & Lenhart,

2006). They are also a “form of narrative that reflects a blogger’s own perspective

and judgment on an issue, leaving the interpretation and evaluation to readers”

(Baumer, Sueyoshi, & Tomlinson, 2008; Ekdale, Namkoong, Fung, & Perlmutter,

2010: 219). Blog genres vary and can range from a personal journal that expresses an

individual focus, to an influential political publication that is concerned with

community issues and outcomes, or may cover niche interest topics such as fashion,

fishing, cooking, travel and so on. The subject matter of blogs is unlimited.

In 2005, the Pew Center reported that eight million people in the US had created

blogs and thirty-two million regularly read blogs. By 2006, those numbers had

significantly increased to twelve million creators and fifty–seven million readers

(Lenhart & Fox, 2006). In 2008, Pew Internet research reported that thirty-three per

cent of all Internet users read blogs, twelve per cent had created a blog, but only five

per cent of users created content for their blog on a daily basis (A. Smith, 2008).

The Technorati 2010 edition of The State of the Blogosphere reports that blogs are

“in transition” (Sobel, 2010). In recent years the practice of blogging has evolved

79

with the incorporation of new social media platforms such as micro-blogging

(primarily Twitter), and live blogging,52 an instant messaging service that allows

users to join the blogger in conversation in real time. Bloggers’ use of and

engagement with various social media tools is expanding, and the lines between

blogs, micro-blogs, and social networks are blurring. As the blogosphere converges

with social media, sharing of blog posts is increasingly done through social

networks, even though blogs remain significantly more influential on content than

are social networks.

Recent studies show that young people, in particular, are migrating away from their

blogs and using Facebook to communicate with their target communities, while

conversely blogging by more mature aged bloggers has increased (Kopytoff, 2011).

The use of the blog format by mainstream news media has, so far, remained constant

for the last several years.

Early Public Affairs Blogs

Many of the “early blogs were produced by professional journalists or political

insiders seeking to free themselves from the editorial shackles of mainstream

newsrooms or the central party HQ” (Campbell et al., 2010: 32; Drezner & Farrell,

2004: 15). Following the terrorist events in the US in 2001, there was concern within

the news journalism community that many “mainstream media outlets abdicated their

independent role: they capitulated to the White House demand that they fall in with

the “‘patriotic’ message” (Moeller, 2008: 169). This view of professional journalism

is supported by Hammond and Herman who argue that when journalistic methods

such as objectivity and truth are sacrificed for patriotism then journalists become “de

facto enemies of democracy, and servants of the policy making elite” (Hammond &

Herman, 2000: 201). The absence of objectivity53 became most obvious and of

greatest concern during the Iraq War, when a large percentage of the US population

were unaware of important facts about the war or the terrorist attacks that

precipitated it (Sambrook, 2004).54 Some journalists felt compelled to tell their own

stories and began to use personal blogs to express their own point of view on issues

of war,55 their aim to develop discursive political communities to run alongside, but

independently to those created by traditional news media.

80

Blogs have become an important element of the online world, and they have been

shown to have significant influence in political discourse both in the blogosphere and

mainstream news media (Drezner & Farrell, 2004: 19; Sobel, 2010). The

blogosphere, referred to as alternative (Atton & Hamilton, 2008a: 47) and adversarial

journalism (Curran, 2005: 127), continues to do “‘valuable and admirable work

keeping mainstream journalism on its toes,’ and it performs invaluable service by

linking to excellent coverage of events and issues so that coverage doesn’t get

entirely forgotten after the news cycle in which it appeared” (Moeller, 2008;

Schanberg, 2005: 175). Moreover, bloggers have a tendency to focus on information

neglected or ignored by mainstream news media (Lowrey, 2006: 477). More people

consult independent political blog sites today than ever before, with research

showing blogs about public affairs register more visits than others (Zuniga, 2009:

109). There are several examples of how blogging can have a significant impact on

political careers, one of which includes the resignation of Trent Lott following the

blogosphere’s coverage of anti-social/racist comments made at a party. While the

mainstream media brushed over the incident, the blogosphere’s comprehensive and

relentless coverage and disapproving critiques led to the Senator’s resignation from

political office (Curran, 2005: 127; Drezner & Farrell, 2004; G. Reynolds & Lenhart,

2006). The capacity for blogs to influence the public debate, based on their ability to

interconnect or network, is proven to be powerful. Moreover, blogs that have built

reputations as reliable and credible sources are taken seriously by mainstream media

opinion makers and may be taken into account in the wider political debate (Drezner

& Farrell, 2004: 23).

Ordinary citizens popularised the use of blogs long before traditional news media

organisations decided to adopt the practice. Professional news journalism initially

viewed bloggers as unprofessional and unreliable sources of information.

Professional news journalism carries a number of values that often conflict with the

blogging practice, including accuracy, which sits under the umbrella of verification,

and objectivity. One of the key benefits of blogging is the immediacy in which

information can be disseminated, however in some instances, the speed with which

information is posted on a citizen blog is largely unattainable by a professional news

organisation whose verification56 process is often complex and lengthy. While speed

is of the essence to professional journalism, so too is the development and

81

maintenance of trust and credibility.57 It is on this basis that information published on

traditional news sites is subject to a routine verification process before publication.

The notion of objectivity is a strongly contested element of journalism and is often

held up as one of the distinguishing characteristics between blogging and

professional journalism.58

Blogs are often perceived to comprise of opinion and information recycled from

traditional news sites: (Bruns, 2008: 93; Tremayne, 2007: 261). Further, on the

whole, they are sometimes described as “unedited, unfiltered and opinionated”

(Hermida, 2008: 3), and:

“It is evident even from only a casual glance at the sites and blogs of

citizen journalists that in many cases the produsers involved treat the

products of the industrial journalism process as raw material for their

own work; journalistic content is repurposed, reappropriated, and

remixed as is required for its use as catalyst for citizen journalism, and

traditional news content is therefore introduced in the open news pool

with little regard for questions of copyright or ‘fair use’” (Bruns, 2008:

93).

Campbell et al. argue that bloggers can act as “re-framers, interrogating, challenging

and making transparent elements contributing to mainstream media framing of news

events” (Campbell et al., 2010: 42). On the other hand, as previously explained,

some blogs have become very influential in the political public sphere (Drezner &

Farrell, 2004: 19).

Blogs in Traditional Newsrooms

While the uptake of news blogging by traditional news media, compared to the

general population, was slow, news organisations began to realise the value of the

Web and news blogs following the events of September 11, 2001.59 Blogs are used in

newsrooms to build trust, loyalty and credibility (MacKinnon, 2005: 3). They enable

journalists to provide readers with up to the minute information as it comes to hand

and to engage in conversation with local, national and global audiences. In the early

days of news blogging, benefits of the new discursive closeness between newsrooms

82

and the public (MacKinnon, 2005: 14)60 saw the development of new ways for

editorial staff to expand and enhance the production and distribution practices of

journalism.

Blogging in traditional news media settings is a way for journalists to bring “public

participation and debate into the everyday practice of journalism” (Rutigliano, 2007:

225). Research shows “[b]logs lower the threshold of entry to the global debate for

traditionally unheard or marginalised voices” (Coleman, 2005: 277) and therefore

encourage political participation (Zuniga, 2009: 114). Participation occurs at a higher

rate in populations of political news media users than those using media for interests

other than public affairs and current events, such as entertainment, recreation and

amusement, all of which are “associated with lower levels of political interest”

(Zuniga, 2009: 114).

The use of blogs by professional journalists enhances their practice in a number of

ways. Blogs are used to interactively communicate with audience during both the

newsgathering and distribution processes (Hermida, Fletcher, Korell, & Logan,

2011). They use blogs to provide the audience with information that would otherwise

end up on the ‘cutting room floor’, which in the newsroom is full of “facts,

interviews, asides, anecdotes, context, insights and media” (Gahran, 2011), due to

limited publishing space in traditional print and broadcast formats. The vastness of

the online environment provides journalists with ample space to present more in-

depth analysis and opinion, often using content that was traditionally for the most

part discarded due to it falling outside of the scope of the narrative, or to missed

deadlines. Blogs allow journalists to provide information using one or more discrete

storytelling formats including, video, still images, slideshows and text. The blog post

is an ongoing entity that allows for the posting of the seeds of stories that grow as

new information, generated through public comment, collaboration and further

research, comes to hand (Marsh, 2011). It can be updated as often as required in

contrast to traditional fixed formats. Research shows that audiences use blogs to gain

a better understanding of information, with fifty-seven per cent indicating they enjoy

the participatory aspect that allows them to interact within the blog’s comment forum

(Hermida et al., 2011).

83

Journalists can also use independent blogs to gather specialised and locally produced

content, particularly in areas of conflict (D. Bennett, 2011). Local bloggers are more

likely to have the time and inclination to develop in-depth local expert knowledge

than the professional journalist who is required to report on the wider field of issues

and events. When a story breaks in a particular area, it is likely that local bloggers

have already started to contextualise the event before traditional news media have

had a chance to connect with it (Drezner & Farrell, 2004: 3). Locally produced

information is often used for background and as a starting point for the mainstream

news media journalist’s own investigations (Townend, 2011). These blogs can also

be used as a source of verification (Murray, 2011).

Limitations of Blogging

One of the recognised limitations of the blogging process to the democratic process

is the potential to encourage groupthink. Several authors have raised concern that

“people cluster around sources of information and channels of communication that

support their values and prejudices” (Coleman, 2005: 278; Keen, 2007; Putnam,

1995: 173; Sunstein, 2001b). This means there is a tendency for people to

consistently consult only those publications supporting their own existing

viewpoints, which invariably reinforces their own beliefs. The chance for people to

discover new ideas through participation in the “marketplace of ideas” (Coleman,

2005) is limited by this habitual practice.

In 2003 Clay Shirky expressed concern that bloggers with very large audiences may

not be equipped with the resources required to respond to everyone, which would

render the format as a broadcast platform rather than a many-to-many conversation

(Shirky, 2003). The BBC Blog Network exemplifies this concern, outsourcing61 the

moderation of many thousand public comments it receives everyday because the

newsroom simply does not have the journalistic resources to respond to everybody.

Blog Hyperlinks (Links): Some Do and Some Don’t

Hyperlinks carry a lot of weight in discussions about news blogs because they are

seen to be enablers of interactivity, diversity, credibility and transparency. Dan

Gillmor says: “Links are the fundamental unit of the Web. They are an invitation to

see more, to drill deeper, to explore information” (Gillmor, 2009: 7). Traditional

84

news media organisations are often criticised for their reluctance to use the hyperlink

in this way. Instead of linking to sources and complementary information outside of

their own domains, many news organisations tend to either practice internal linking

or else they do not link at all (Searls, 2011). Gillmor insists that drawing attention to

sites beyond their own does not have to result in their endorsement of others’

material, but rather signifies that it is at least aware of its existence (Gillmor, 2009:

7).

The most commonly expressed reason for commercially produced news publications

not linking out is that it compromises their editorial mission, which is to keep readers

on site for the benefit of advertising campaigns (Hespos, 2008: 141; Searls, 2011).62

However, Weinberger proposes that since the mission of many news organisations,

commercial, public and independent, includes an objective to foster humanity by

creating connections between individuals and global society, linking becomes more

important for knowing what happens to others in other parts of the world

(Weinberger, 2008: 190). Moving away from editorial reasons, Kevin Anderson says

many organisations do not use links for purely technical reasons. He says,

“newsroom workflow is still print-centric” (K. Anderson, 2011), which means that

news content is prepared for print first, using print tools, and the addition of links

within the story during the transformation to HTML, which is the last task in the

process, is largely overlooked (Karp, 2011). David Domingo contends “[t]he

professional culture of traditional journalism has a strong inertia in the online

newsrooms that prevents them from developing most of the ideals of interactivity, as

they do not fit in the standardized news production routines” (Domingo, 2007: 1).

Chris Anderson rebuts the reasoning offered by news organisations for not using

links, with an argument proposing that the recognition and inclusion of the

interactive nature of Web 2.0 technologies become a priority for organisational

workflow (C. Anderson, 2011).63

Research by Jonathon Stray shows online only publications are more likely to “make

good use of links in their stories” (Stray, 2010) than multiplatform publications

(those that include broadcast and online platforms such as the BBC), which generally

only link to their own content. In his survey of twelve online news outlets, Stray’s

research found BBC News to be the only organisation that did not provide embedded

85

hyperlinks to internal, external or topic pages64 in the body of its news articles.

Rather, the BBC prefers to contain its links in a side bar alongside its stories (S

Herrmann, 2010; Stray, 2010). In addition to the embedded links and the links side

bar, the BBC runs a “See Also”65 blog which contains a collection of the best content

from the web on popular topics selected by BBC editorial staff. This blog provides a

link to each site of interest and a small excerpt from each story. As a result of the

2010 BBC Strategy Review,66 its policy on linking was revised based on a re-

conceptualisation of linking as added value to the BBC’s journalistic best practice

(see Chapter 4).

In October 2008, the BBC trialled an application called Apture, which allows stories

to include embedded inline links to external sites without leaving the home site.

When a link is clicked, a text box showing content from an external site appears on

the same page. The text box is a smaller window that allows the reader to scroll up

and down through additional information without leaving the home site page (see

Figure 3.2).

The BBC has been both applauded and criticised for this practice (N. Reynolds,

2008). No longer in use, critics argued that it operated in opposition to one of the

most distinctive and collaborative elements that underpin blogging. Lloyd Shepherd

criticised the BBC for acting “like a particularly ill-informed media company, hugely

resistant to ‘sending users elsewhere’ and determined to keep their claws in the

user’s flesh for as long as possible” (Shepherd, 2008). Ben Metcalfe, on the other

hand, supported the initiative. He says:

“[T]he purpose of Apture is not to replace hyperlinking, and it would be

wrong to use it in this way. It’s a tool that brings small amounts of

relevant content to the user’s attention so that they are minimally

distracted from their reading. The idea is that the user can gain

background information about the themes/topics/etc. they are reading

about so that they can better engage with the story” (Metcalfe, 2008).

86

Figure 3.2. An example of Apture. Adapted from The Ben Metcalfe Blog.

http://benmetcalfe.com/blog/2008/08/apture-trial-on-BBC-news-website-a-great-success/

Creating Conversations in Comment Forums

Comment forums are an integral part of blogs and as such have, to varying degrees,

assumed a place in all genres of journalism. As spaces for public access to

journalism, and additional sites for the exchange of information comment and

opinion, the forums allow readers to engage with a blog author as well as other

readers’ points of view on specific topic areas.

The online environment is a source of many successes and failures of different

commenting forums. Getting the practice right has been a process of trial and error

for many. Their value is widely contested, with general criticisms often describing

the practice as useless and toxic, “these forums are insidiously contributing to the

devaluation of journalism, blurring the truth, confusing the issues, and diminishing

serious discourse beyond even talk radio’s worst examples” (Bailey, 2009 In F.

Wilson, 2009). Gillmor suggests the problem arises because many news forums are

“poorly administered” (Gillmor, 2009: 6). Problems such as poor, off track and

abusive commenting occur when comment threads are left unattended. Fred Wilson

argues, “simply adding a comment thread at the end of a news story is a recipe for

trouble” (F. Wilson, 2009).

Similarly, Jeff Jarvis says he used to think comments from the public on news blogs

were a good idea, but he now believes “comments are the voice of assholes” (Jarvis,

87

2010). While he acknowledges there is sometimes some value in comments, these

are largely buried in the fracas. The problem, according to Jarvis, stems from the old

lecture format that journalists use to communicate information to the public. He

suggests the practice of news blogging is much the same format where the media

presents a completed product to the public for comment (Jarvis, 2010). He says

journalists throw their stories over the wall and society comments; society throws a

brick back at the wall; the wall doesn’t answer, and so society becomes angry and

nasty (Jarvis, 2010). Charlie Beckett agrees: “Comments on political blogs do not

create constructive debates. Despite clever attempts at moderation, referring and

filtering, the conversation around blogs is still random. Fun, sometimes insightful,

but it makes a limited contribution to anything approximating to the public sphere”

(Beckett, 2009).

Some types of news media comment systems and the associated issues arising from

their use are described below. Comment systems are varied and each has its distinct

characteristics. Organisations deploy different rules and guidelines to achieve their

aims. Systems use different degrees of hosting and moderation as listed below:

• Hosted: the journalist moderates and interacts with participants’ comments

about the topic.

• Un-hosted: is not moderated by the journalist, nor does the journalist

participate in the conversation. The comments can be moderated or un-

moderated and comments are not confined to the topic.

• Moderated: moderators use specific policy guidelines that give them the

power to accept and reject the comments that are submitted to the site for

publication. The moderation process is further divided into pre-moderated

and post moderated.

• Pre-moderated: comments are moderated before they are posted to

the site. During the pre-moderation process, some comments might be

rejected based on breaches of the organisation’s comment policy.

• Post Moderation: comments are moderated after they have been

published. This occurs in two ways:

88

o Peer Moderation: other users of the site flag the comment as

inappropriate.

o Host Moderation: the host of the site determines the comment

has breached the policy code of the site.

• Un-moderated: commenting systems allow automatic publication of all

comments submitted to the site.

It has become standard practice for news sites to require users to register before

being allowed to submit their comments for publication on a news site. Sites that do

not require registration generate a larger number of spam, anti-social and off topic

comments than those that ask participants to register (Wunsch-Vincent & Vickery,

2006: 58).

The Guardian started using blogs in 2000, and later became one of the first

newspaper sites in the UK to use blogs collaboratively with readers. In 2008,

following a refinement of the design and technology of user comment forums housed

under the banner of “Communities and User Experience”, the organisation

announced that users were now required to register before posting comments. The

registration system creates a user profile page (Figure 3.3), which logs a history of

each user’s participation on the site. There are various advantages to this system,

with the key benefit being the ease with which posters with a history of offensive

comments can be traced. On the editorial level, the introduction of basic formatting

features such as block quotes and links is a further benefit to the readability of

comments.

Derek Powazek says compulsory registration does not eradicate the problems

associated with comment forums. Moreover, he says the need remains for some users

to participate in comment forums anonymously. He proposes that organisations

allow for anonymous comments. To guard against anti-social participants, comments

should not be published immediately but rather “held in a special moderation queue

for approval” (Powazek, 2008), i.e. a form of pre-moderation.

89

Figure 3.3. An example of a registered user’s profile page. Note that users are required to provide

their real name. Adapted from the Guardian. Guardian.co.uk/discussion/user/thedullfig

Crowdsourcing in the Digital Environment

Crowdsourced journalism is largely conducted in the spirit of Dan Gillmor’s

assertion, “my readers know more than I do” (Gillmor, 2006: 13). Crowdsourcing is

a practice found in many fields, including open source software development, Q+A

websites and collaborative encyclopaedias such as Wikipedia. The practice is used

“to tap the latent talent of the crowd” (Howe, 2006), in the belief that the crowd

collectively knows as much if not more than professionals.

While it is not actually a new technology of journalism, it is a new term, and the

practice is greatly enhanced with the general use of Web 2.0 technologies (Yahr,

2007). Brabham says the term crowdsourcing does not predate the Internet and is not

a term that applies to just any instance of an online community, rather it refers to “an

online, distributed problem solving and production model” (Brabham, 2008). More

specifically, he says: “Crowdsourcing works when an organisation has a problem to

solve or a product to design, and the organisation opens that challenge up to an

online community with specific solution parameters” (Brabham, 2008).

In 2007, Robert Niles anticipated that the applied practice of crowdsourcing “might

have more effect on all forms of journalism than anything else that’s come out of the

online journalism revolution” (Niles, 2007). His estimation may prove to be accurate

given that journalists now routinely use the technique to generate a variety of data

including photos, video, and vignettes, all of which aid their creation of

90

professionally produced stories designed for the “public good” (Brabham, 2008).

Traditional news organisations, to varying degrees, have applied the method to

complement a variety of routine practices such as “interviews, observation and the

examination of documents” (Niles, 2007). Journalists report that it provides them

with a lot of material they would not ordinarily obtain through traditional channels of

communication (Taranto, 2008).

Brabham describes four models of crowdsourcing: the Knowledge Discovery and

Management Approach, which draws on particular communities to “find and

assemble information in a specified location”; the Broadcast Search Approach,

which seeks to use the crowd to find the “right answer” to a problem; the Peer Vetted

Creative Production Approach, which aims to discover the “most popular answer” to

a problem to which there is no definitive answer; and finally, the Distributed Human

Intelligence Tasking Approach, which sources the crowd to “process large batches of

data” (Brabham, 2008). Journalism entities, traditional and new, use each of these

models at various times to crowdsource information from their audiences/publics.

Evaluation, verification and analysis of crowdsourced data are labour-intensive

processes. Once data is verified and deemed to be in the public interest, it then

becomes necessary for journalists to contextualise the content for public

consumption. Some of the criticism of crowdsourcing is motivated by concerns about

the costs associated with the entire process. Conversely, other critics argue that the

participants are being exploited for their free labour. A recent example of such

criticism saw a citizen content producer for the Huffington Post launch a class action

against Arianna Huffington after she sold the publication without compensating the

9000 citizen content producers who had contributed content to the Huffington Post

free of charge. Huffington responded: “Our bloggers utilise our platform to connect

and ensure that their ideas and views are seen by as many people as possible. It's the

same reason hundreds of people go on TV shows—to broadcast their views to as

wide an audience as possible” (Sabbagh, 2011). Furthermore, Huffington argues, all

media organisations depend on unpaid contributions, for example, “people appearing

on news programs such as Newsnight are unpaid” (Sabbagh, 2011). In this vein she

argues, “there's got to be a distinction between everybody who works for a media

company and everybody who blogs for a media company” (Sabbagh, 2011).

91

Editorially Controlled User-generated Content

There are many definitions for the concept of user-generated content (UGC), none of

which are commonly agreed upon (Wunsch-Vincent & Vickery, 2006: 8). Paul

Bradshaw (2010b) defines it as material which is not commissioned or paid for by

news organisations, while Claire Wardle describes it as “audience material” (Wardle

& Williams, 2008: 8). Wunsch-Vincent and Vickery describe the dimensions of

UGC as follows: “i) content made publicly available over the Internet, ii) which

reflects a certain amount of creative effort, and iii) which is created outside of

professional routines and practices” (Wunsch-Vincent & Vickery, 2006).67 For the

purposes of this thesis, user-generated content is defined as story-building material

created by amateurs and contributed to online news sites for distribution to a mass

audience.

The conventional news consumer is now well positioned to participate in both

production and consumption practices of news media, given the increased ease of

access and mobility, and the high production quality of new media tools. The value

of citizen-shot video and still pictures sent via mobile devices to the major traditional

news media sites from the scene of unfolding disasters, such as the Asian Tsunami,

the London bombings and the US Airways airplane crash into the Hudson River in

New York, is high because they often show an extent of drama and devastation

previously unseen (Moeller, 2008: 181). These citizen-generated pictures, and the

many more from political uprisings and other events that have followed, often

become the “iconic pictures of the day” (Quinn, 2006) (for example, the photo of the

woman jumping from a burning building into the arms of fire fighters in the midst of

the 2011 London riots (Kwek, 2011)).

While most news media organisations have expanded their editorial policies to

incorporate the publication of user-generated content as part of their service, their

economic strategies in relation to the content are also subject to modification. While

some organisations manage to gain authorisation from the creators to use the content

free of charge, user-generated content is not considered to be a replacement for the

professionally produced content derived from their routine practices of journalism.

The incorporation of user-generated content with traditional newsroom output

92

requires new editorial strategies, resources and innovative “frameworks and facilities

for UGC creators to publish” (Wunsch-Vincent & Vickery, 2006: 5).

The news industry is comprised of different kinds of news organisations/journalism

entities, each with its own purpose, and each taking different approaches to the use of

user-generated content. Sites such as the BBC, the Guardian, the various News

Limited publications, and independent news entities such as OhmyNews, WikiLeaks,

Storyful, Demotix and Ushahidi each take a different approach to user-generated

content. Some appeal to their publics for specific content using a variety of services

and platforms, and other times members of the public contribute unsolicited material.

The desire for individuals to contribute content and comment is motivated by a

number of factors. Some people offer content for remuneration, for example a news

organisation may be willing to pay non-professionals for the exclusive rights to still

and/or video images of their eyewitness accounts of significant events. Hargittai lists

some of the motivating factors as, “connecting with peers, achieving a certain level

of fame, notoriety or prestige, and self-expression” (Hargittai, 2009), however she

contends most contribute content and comment simply to engage with the online

community.

Jeff Jarvis is critical of the kinds of pictures that some organisations sometimes

select for news broadcasts. For example, he says, the selection of “ordinary photos

taken in peoples’ own homes” (Jarvis, 2010) during the UK snow blizzards was

“inherently insulting” given that they could have selected the “best pictures” (Jarvis,

2010).

Many organisations now operate with a mixture of citizen and professionally

produced content, and most maintain editorial control to ensure the values and

principles of professional journalism are upheld. Pro-am journalism combines the

raw material provided by the amateur journalist with the editorial finesse that makes

it attractive and usable for a wide audience (Shirky, 2009). The online environment

presents news organisations with much more space to publish user-generated content

than was possible using traditional print and broadcast platforms. Table 3.2 shows a

categorisation of major user-generated content types used by each media model

included in this research.

93

Table 3.2

Types of User Generated Content

Content Type

Genre

Description

Technology

Text

Personal;

Opinion; and Event

Personal Blogs;

Collaborative Blogs;

Popular Blogs

Wikipedia;

Facebook;

Newsrooms

Mobile

technologies such

as smart phones and

iPads;

Computers;

Word Processing

software.

Still Photo and

Video Images

Personal;

Eye Witness View;

Public Event;

Natural Disaster;

and

Citizen Journalism.

Photos taken by

non-professionals

and posted to the

various online photo

sharing sites such as

Flickr, YouTube,

Facebook, Personal

Blogs, Newsrooms.

Mobile

technologies such

as smart phones and

iPads;

Computers;

Computer

softwares; and

Cameras.

Audio Personal;

Eye Witness View;

Public Event;

Natural Disaster;

and

Citizen Journalism.

Audio posted to

online sites such as

Audioboo,

Facebook, Personal

Blogs, Newsrooms

Mobile applications

for smart phones;

Podcasting;

and

Audio recorders.

The production and consumption of user-generated content has wide-ranging

benefits for the public and news organisations alike. It has the capacity to impact on

public debates, create diversity of opinion, lead to greater transparency, and to

showcase the “free flow of information and freedom of expression” (Wunsch-

94

Vincent & Vickery, 2006: 6) a fundamental principle of democratic societies. In

places where journalists cannot be present for political or other reasons, or in places

where communication through the usual channels is temporarily or permanently

disconnected, content produced by those with access to the situation have the

capacity to tell the story of what is happening (J. Keller, 2011). This kind of

interactivity between organisations, industry professionals and the public enhances

the relationships between them. BBC editor Matthew Eltringham (2009) believes the

audience has an “invaluable role” in storytelling. It is from this conceptual

framework that many news organisations now incorporate the use of user-generated

content into their editorial policies.

Verification of User-Generated Content

The use of raw user-generated content by traditional journalism sites has added extra

pressures to editorial controls on the production, content and distribution of

information (Shirky, 2009). Primarily, news organisations take care to ensure user-

generated content does not conflict with their own editorial policies. Then, given

how easy it has become to manipulate and plagiarise content, newsrooms should

carefully consider questions about the authenticity of every firsthand account of the

news events it covers.

Most have developed unique and stringent verification processes for content

produced by those who do not apply professional routines to the production of news

content (Wunsch-Vincent & Vickery, 2006: 9) (see later chapters for specific

examples). The practice at the Guardian, for instance, has been to run the

information it has with an explanation about how it got it. Oliver says the Guardian’s

main aim when using this method is to be seen as transparent (Oliver, 2011).

Social Media

Olmstead et al. say social media has helped news organisations to reach a broader

audience, with the flow of traffic from sites such as Facebook and many others

increasing by 57 per cent during the two years 2010—2012 (Olmstead, Sasseen,

Mitchell, & Rosenstiel, 2012). However, their 2012 report also suggests that social

media provides less referrals compared to the number of users who go directly to

95

news sites for news. Furthermore, Facebook provides more referrals than Twitter

(Olmstead et al., 2012).

Social media has changed the way news media have conversations with the public by

providing a new way to interact. While journalists traditionally rely on sources such

as databases, libraries and government offices, in the past they would have had to

leave the office and meet people as part of the method of investigation (Shirky, 2009;

Townend, 2011). Social media has added a new dimension to the tool set, providing

more convenient and increased access to greater volumes of leads and information,

and has become an everyday part of doing their job.

Social media practices are community centric; they are diverse and collaborative and

occur on multiple platforms in varied formats. Definitions of social media are largely

concerned with Internet communication technologies that enable different forms of

social interaction. Some of the different forms of social media include, static, live

and micro blogs, professional networking, syndication of aggregated content (RSS)

and photo, video, friend, music and bookmark sharing sites. While there are many

different forms of social media, there are also many different uses for the content.

Bruns and Bahnisch define social media sites as: “Websites which build on Web 2.0

technologies to provide space for in-depth social interaction, community formation,

and the tackling of collaborative projects” (Bruns & Bahnisch, 2009: 7).

Many traditional news media organisations are now using a range of social media

technologies, which pose multiple challenges to the traditional practices of

journalism and to the already strained budgets. While it is important for editorial

staff to engage with social media in ways that both market the business and connect

with sources and audiences, it is equally important for organisations to be able to

monitor and measure the benefits of the technology. Organisations are experiencing

extra financial strain through having to redirect funds into research, development and

deployment of social media without the benefit of being sure of the value it adds to

their social and economic position. Compounding this financial expense, the use of

social media by ordinary businesses has created yet another economic loss for the

news industry since business no longer needs to rely on traditional media to market

its products. Business is increasingly becoming its own media company, telling its

96

own story, and inviting clients to engage with it directly (Edelman, 2010).

Consequently, the allocation of funding for news media advertising budgets by

business has shifted away from traditional media to fund in-house social media

initiatives (Hogarth-Scott, 2010).

A particularly socially pervasive tool, Twitter, emerged in 2006 as a service that

allows users to share information in a text-based format within the limits of one

hundred and forty characters. Now with over 200 million users, it is the most

commonly used micro blogging platform to connect the public with traditional news

content.

The use of Twitter and other social networks present new and diverse ways for

journalists to gather and disseminate information and has evolved as a useful and

effective way for journalists to interact with others, including audience, sources,

colleagues and collaborators. The use of Twitter by the news industry had developed

generally in three phases: first, journalists joined Twitter independent of their news

organisation; then news organisations began to produce automated news feeds

through the Twitter networks; and finally news organisations encouraged journalists

to use Twitter as a tool to develop technologies of journalism.68 Some news

journalists joined Twitter as early as 2006, which in some instances was up to three

years before their employers adopted the platform as part of professional practice.

When news organisations first officially joined the social network, their

communications were largely one-way and comprised of automated news feeds only.

While this practice remains commonplace in most organisations, some have trialled

the inclusion of interactivity into the process. For example, the New York Times

(NYT) switched from an automated Twitter process, which ordinarily contains a

headline and a hyperlink to the story on its website, to include personalised responses

by two social media editors to the public’s tweets (Sonderman, 2011). Similarly, the

Wall Street Journal (WSJ) has also experienced success with “human-powered

feeds”, saying it “do[es] much, much better than automated ones, by any relevant

metric” (Sonderman, 2011). The aim of the NYTs initiative in this instance was to

convert its 3.2 million Twitter followers into website visitors (Sonderman, 2011). For

the WSJ, the personalised approach to Twitter resulted in more subscription

97

renewals. The approach taken by both organisations suggests that they are motivated

to engage with the community as an important part of their business strategy rather

than their broader obligation to democracy. Moeller contends many commercial

media outlets do not concern themselves with their role in democracy because “it is

not a line item on a profit-and-loss statement” (Moeller, 2008: 180). But in any

event, increased engagement through economic drivers remains an encouraging

democratising side effect.

Journalists across all models of news media are increasingly using Twitter to develop

and improve the technologies of journalism. Some of the developments include

crowdsourcing activities, while improvements include: new ways to find contacts;

connect with people in local and remote locations; develop story ideas; research

background information; discover new media tools; keep an eye on the topics and

tone of the public debates; monitor the state of the industry; and to stay abreast of

competitors.

Twitter has become one of the key platforms used to discover breaking news. After

only three years of general use by a global public, Jemima Kiss said the Guardian,

like many other news organisations, discovered breaking stories from other parts of

the world via Twitter, such as the Buffalo plane crash (2009), the Hudson River

rescue (2009) and the death of a British student in the French Alps (2009) (Kiss,

2009). More recently, Hu et al. have claimed the news of Osama Bin Laden’s death

first broke on Twitter, and although journalists were not the first to tweet the news,

they played a large part in breaking the news to a wider audience (Hu et al., 2012: 1).

In this vein, Alfred Hermida describes Twitter as an “alert system”, since it is often

the first word on crisis events. Furthermore, it is also “an awareness system”

(Hermida, 2011) because, regardless of social and professional status, or

geographical boundaries, it maintains people’s awareness of each others’ “activities,

context or status” (Hermida, 2011). Hermida’s thesis suggests the act of tweeting

reveals that its inherent quality is a form of journalism, which he describes as

“ambient journalism” (Hermida, 2011: 301). The tweeting process involves the

transmission of fragments of information including photos, video, audio and text,

which enable the receiver to piece together a story about what is happening in the

world.

98

The idea of Twitter as journalism is both embraced and challenged by the news

industry and academia. Some assert that the aggregation of tweets about an issue or

event can provide enough facts about the news to be categorised as “a source of

journalism” (Ingram, 2008) while others argue that it is merely “a platform like radio

or TV but with unfettered interactivity” (Posetti, 2009). Julie Posetti sees it as a way

for professional journalists to produce real time reporting, with the composition of

the tweet being similar to writing news headlines (Posetti, 2009). Twitter’s leading

lawyer Alex Macgillivray says, “journalism and Twitter share a similar goal of

uniting users with the issues that are most meaningful to them” (J. Roberts, 2012).

However, on the question of whether Twitter is a media company, he says it is a

technology company and notes “I haven’t heard of anyone stopping delivery of the

New York Times because they’re avid Twitter users” (J. Roberts, 2012).

The question of whether Twitter is journalism is also problematic for industry

professionals, with many answering that it is not. Kiss describes Twitter as a

communication tool and says “the fact that New Yorkers reported on the plane crash

on Twitter is a given, and no more surprising than the same people using the phone

to pass on news” (Kiss, 2009). Laura Oliver says the problem with the debate about

the idea of Twitter as journalism stems largely from a tendency to “conflate the tools

[of journalism] with [the technology of] journalism and sometimes we put too much

weight on these tools” (Oliver, 2011). Former BBC journalist, Kevin Marsh, suggests

the debate carries a misunderstanding about the difference between data and

journalism. He says journalism is more than simply processing data for a production

line, but rather it is about talking to people and telling stories (Marsh, 2011). Philip

Meyer’s thoughts on journalism insist that there needs to be more to it than simply

“[p]iling up facts and putting them in clever packages” and says it requires an

“interpretive framework” (Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2010: 161–164; P. Meyer, 2008).

For Marsh, the most important quality of journalism is the narrative journalists

construct around the data. He says one of the risks of treating Twitter as journalism is

that there is tendency for the information it circulates to prematurely generate

legitimacy before any of it has been substantiated (Marsh, 2011). Similarly,

Townend warns that it is unwise for journalists to put too much weight on the

information gained through social media because, she says, it is not necessarily

representative of society (Townend, 2011).

99

This leads into one of the main concerns about Twitter: whether it is a reliable source

of news. During the uprisings in Iran, which directly followed the result of the 2009

Presidential election, the information that circulated on Twitter was inundated with

unsubstantiated claims presented as fact. The event was a very fast moving,

politically and socially volatile situation. Former BBC Global News Director,

Richard Sambrook, monitored the activity on Twitter for the period of the event69

during which he was acutely aware that not everything in the network was true. He

grouped tweets into distinct categories, realising some were true, some were the

result of confusion and some may have been “planted in the hope of inciting more

protests and support” (Sambrook, 2009a). News organisations were faced with this

same task, to quickly filter large volumes of information supplied by a wide range of

sources from both inside and outside of Iran, and to discover what was actually

happening. Sambrook also assessed the rate at which information flowed through

Twitter compared to traditional news organisations. By his calculations, Twitter ran

“significantly ahead” (Sambrook, 2009b) of traditional newsrooms, however he

points out that it was journalism’s professional obligation to substantiate every claim

with hard evidence that slowed the flow of reports compared to Twitter.

In all politically and socially volatile situations such as the Iran riots, the skills of

journalism—evaluation, verification and contextualisation—remain essential to

maintaining credibility and the trust of the general public. This obligation has led to

the creation of many new positions with new job descriptions in newsrooms

throughout the world to manage social media. This is yet another expense for

newsrooms with many being forced to over-extend existing resources to minimise

costs. Sonderman says there is a need for greater investment in this area (Sonderman,

2011). The Guardian’s head of communities and user experience, Meg Pickard

agrees: “if all you do is hire somebody to look after your social media activity and

potentially install a Twitter client on everybody’s computer back at the office,

without thinking about why you are doing it or how it is going to change the

organisation, then you are only doing half the thinking” (British Broadcasting

Corporation, 2011b).

Facebook is another social media tool used by journalists and news organisations to:

build a professional presence; for newsgathering, reporting, crowdsourcing and

100

distribution of information; interactions with the public; drive traffic to their online

news website; build their personal brand name; showcase their photos and videos,

including behind the scenes videos; broadcast live updates during times of crisis

(such as natural disasters and political conflict); transmit live video; and connect with

other news feeds, officials, organisations and professionals. Facebook users can sync

their pages with their mobile phones, which means they are always connected to their

information networks (Lavrusik, 2011a, 2011b).

Rory O’Connor says “the rise of Facebook and Twitter herald changes for

journalism, and pose serious challenges to journalistic credibility and trust”

(O'Connor, 2009). The news industry is increasingly accepting of the idea that

people are willing to consume their content on external websites, especially

Facebook. The premise that people are more likely to engage with information

gained through a friend is why Facebook is thought to be a good platform for the

distribution of news. People trust their friends to help them filter the vast amount of

information just as much as they rely on friends to provide them with movie or

restaurant recommendations (O'Connor, 2009).

While there is uncertainty about how long social media tools such as Facebook and

Twitter might last, at this point in time journalists are using Facebook as a way to

engage in the public conversation (Townend, 2011). Ideally, the news content posted

on Facebook encourages people to participate in the public debate by adding

comments and ‘liking’ posts (O'Connor, 2009). Townend says regardless of what

happens to Facebook, journalists will always find other similar spaces for their work

in the future (Townend, 2011).

Conclusion

This chapter has reviewed the traditional and new relationships between journalism

and civil society and described the ways in which new Web 2.0 tools such as news

blogs and social media, and technologies70 including crowdsourcing and ultimately

networked journalism can enhance journalism’s role in a democracy. It has provided

a framework from which to understand the ways in which some news organisations

undertake initiatives that encourage the public to share information about the world

through the expression of personal viewpoints, the production of user-generated

101

content and in news blog comment forums and other spaces. This review suggests

the incorporation of the World Wide Web into the daily routines of the newsroom

has added civic value to news products and opened a narrow pathway to the

democratisation of journalism.

This chapter, together with Chapter 2, provides the foundational framework through

which the case studies in the following chapters will be examined.

38 Web 2.0 is the network as platform, spanning all connected devices; Web 2.0 applications are those that make the most of the intrinsic advantages of that platform: delivering software as a continually-updated service that gets better the more people use it, consuming and remixing data from multiple sources, including individual users, while providing their own data and services in a form that allows remixing by others, creating network effects through an "architecture of participation," and going beyond the page metaphor of Web 1.0 to deliver rich user experiences (O'Reilly, 2005). 39 See Selwyn (2004) for a more in-depth review of the concept of the digital divide. 40 Jenkins remains a key participant in the online news ecology; he contributes opinion for the Guardian’s Comment is Free and other online news publications. 41 See for example Graeme Turner (2012) for more on the public’s disengagement with public affairs. 42 Dan Gillmor writes: “OhmyNews has shaken up the journalism and political establishments” (Gillmor, 2004). 43 General use defined throughout the thesis as “use by everybody”. 44 Chosun, Dong-A and JoongAng dominated the industry prior to the year 2000 (Kwak, 2011: 89). 45 The lecture model is read, view and listen only. 46 Benkler refers to the New York Times and Washington Post’s investigations that led to the Watergate Inquiry in 1973, but a more recent example is the Guardian’s investigation in 2010 into the wrongdoings of News International, which led to the Leveson Inquiry. 47 Authors such as Graeme Turner have expressed the same opinion (G. Turner, 2010: 5). 48 Marginalized or disinterested. 49 Definition of a social movement: “a group of people with a common ideology who try together to achieve certain general goals” wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn 50 The Pew research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism provides a comprehensive list of the tools of journalism in the digital age. http://www.journalism.org/resources/j_tools 51 Conversation is defined here as formal or informal dialogue between two or more people that may or may not involve opposing points of view. 52 Live blogging includes first person accounts in the coverage of world events (Oliver, 2011). It allows readers to witness the events, through the eyes of the reporter, as they happen. Alan Rusbridger says the live blog is “influential media” since it allows users to incorporate multiple and diverse sources of content, include links in and out and ultimately creates a lot of activity around the blog http://www.bbc.co.uk/journalism/blog/2011/05/bbcsms-what-next.shtml. 53 Objectivity is explained in more detail in Chapter 7. 54 The full text of the University of Maryland’s Executive Summary: “Media Coverage of Weapons of Mass Destruction” is available at: http://www.cissm.umd.edu/papers/display.php?id=269. 55 Salam Pax is known as the blogger who helped bring blogging to attention of the world. Beginning September 2002, he used his blog, Where is Raed, to publish information about life in Iraq and the Saddam Hussein regime (Gurak, Antonijevic et al., 2004). 56 The BBC provides information about its own modernised verification methods used for processing user-generated content (Murray, 2011). 57 Carroll and Richardson’s work on credibility argues mainstream media “may want to adopt more of the principles and techniques of blogging, including the practice of being transparent” (Carroll & Richardson, 2011) See also the work of Rieh and Danielson on credibility (Rieh & Danielson, 2007) pp. 141. 58 The concept of objectivity and other elements of journalism are defined and explained in the latter part of this review.

102

59 The Guardian in London was the first major news organisation to adopt the practice of blogging (Carroll, 2004) pp. 344. 60 This is explained in more detail the context of each of the case studies in this research, Chapters 3–6. 61 The BBC outsources moderation to specialist moderation companies. 62 Hespos (2008: 141) describes advertisers’ economic business model (Push model) as one-way communication. He contends the dominant advertising model needs to change and argues for a “conversational” model of advertising. 63 Chris Anderson is an academic and has written extensively on Journalism. His research manifesto is here: http://journalismschool.wordpress.com/2011/03/11/the-things-that-tell-us-what-is-true-a-little-research-manifesto/ 64 Topic page links are auto generated and therefore do not require human manipulation. 65 The “See Also” Blog is located here: http://www.BBC.co.uk/blogs/seealso/ 66 BBC Strategy Review is located here: http://www.BBC.co.uk/BBCtrust/assets/files/pdf/review_report_research/strategic_review/strategy_review.pdf 67 Wunsch-Vincent & Vickery (2006: 9-12) provide data and analysis on the global measurement of UGC. 68 Following Castells, Van Dijck contends technology is mutually shaped by a range of “political, economic and social forces” (Van Dijck, 2011) This research aims to show how network technologies have affected the ways in which journalists interact with the social and political world. 69 Sambrook used his personal blog, Sacred Facts, to compile a list of some of the unproven claims. 70 In this instance technology is defined as methods of organisation.

103

Chapter 4 British Broadcasting Corporation

“We aim to engage everyone in the UK with impartial and accurate

news and information. We will help to promote the public’s

understanding of complex issues, which is fundamental to a functioning

democracy. In order to achieve this, we must reach all sections of the

population with services and programmes that offer trusted and

authoritative insight in ways that engage people’s interest” (British

Broadcasting Corporation, 2004: 38).

This chapter will examine the British Broadcasting Corporation’s (BBC) expansion

from broadcasting to online, paying particular attention to how BBC News uses Web

2.0 technologies for the production of journalism to fulfil its obligations to the UK

public, which ultimately encourages citizen engagement with public affairs.

Described as the world’s model public media organisation (Born, 2012: 120; Küng-

Shankleman, 2000: 14), the BBC was created with a strong commitment to social

responsibility to its UK and international publics. Georgina Born says that while the

BBC was the first, “it remains the foremost public service broadcaster worldwide”

(Born, 2012: 120). Its aims are to inform, educate, entertain (Crisell, 2002: 28) and

build cohesive communities through creativity, knowledge, engagement and

conversation. The BBC, first and foremost a broadcaster, produces a diversity of

media products that include journalism, music and culture, drama and comedy,

content for children, and events that bring the nation together (British Broadcasting

Corporation, 2010e). It produces a wide range of services in different formats on

multiple platforms, including Radio, TV, Online and Satellite, to ensure it is

inclusive of a diverse demographic. It aims to “provide ‘something for everyone’”

(Crisell, 2002: 29) and “everything for someone” (Crisell, 2002: 29).

In response to the primary research question about the ways in which the public

broadcaster has transitioned from its traditional broadcast-only news production

processes and platforms to online news environments, this chapter will describe and

analyse four key dimensions of BBC News journalism to show how its use of Web

2.0 technologies has transformed its capacity to provide the public with new

104

participatory and deliberative spaces. Each dimension focuses on particular

characteristics and processes associated with using Web 2.0 technologies to produce

news journalism in the context of a public service news media model.

As explained in Chapter 1, the news media models included in this study were

selected based on the differences and similarities of each. In order to understand the

strategies and activities of any organisation, it is essential first to discover its aims

(what it wants to do) and objectives (how it will do it). Therefore, the first dimension

of study is the BBC’s business model. This section will describe the corporation’s

funding model and strategic direction, which includes showing how its publicly

funded model is used to develop its capacity to practice high standards of social

responsibility and a constant commitment to inclusiveness compared with other

organisations. Revenue for BBC News is allocated for the production of news

journalism and the research and development of the BBC’s professional practice and

innovation. Uniquely, it also provides for the development of schemes that ensure

members of the public are reasonably equipped with the skills required to navigate

and engage with information in a range of digital public sphere

The second dimension of analysis focuses on the extent to which the BBC uses Web

2.0 technologies for the production and distribution of interactive/participatory news

journalism. Viewed from the theoretical perspectives of journalism, public sphere,

deliberation, citizenship and participation discussed in Chapter 2, it will identify,

describe and analyse the transition of BBC News from a broadcast only platform to

one that includes an online environment. The analysis will consider the ways in

which the BBC approaches its role as a member of the Fourth Estate online. This will

be assessed on the extent to which it uses digital technologies to create interactive

and participatory spaces, thereby giving a diversity of publics the opportunity to

engage, collaborate and deliberate with editorial staff and each other on matters of

public interest.

The third dimension will describe the benefits of and challenges to BBC journalism

arising as the result of its use of the new tools and technologies of journalism. This

section describes the BBC’s approach to interactivity and networked journalism,

incorporating discussion about crowdsourcing, the use of user-generated content, and

105

the range of interactive platforms developed by the BBC to provide the public with

equality of access to a common domain for discussion and debate about topics that

affect people’s ordinary lives. It then describes and analyses some of the tools of

journalism emerging from Web 2.0 technologies, including a range of social media

platforms, data mapping tools and VOIP technologies.

The fourth dimension will explain the implications of digital technologies on BBC

news values, how it sets the agenda and how it establishes trust.

Finally, the chapter will draw conclusions about how BBC News defines the concept

of citizen, and the impact of its use of inclusive and participatory technologies and

practices on the democratisation of journalism. This provides a framework from

which to compare and contrast the unique, uncharacteristic or common qualities

(Livingstone, 2003: 483) of the BBC with the other cases of study included in this

research.

The chapter triangulates data drawn from policy documents, regulations, research

and news reports, all of which are publicly available, with theoretical literature and

personal interviews carried out by the author in April 2008 with past and present

BBC editors and journalists Richard Sambrook, Matthew Eltringham, Vicky Taylor

and Kevin Anderson.

4.1 A Public Media Business Model

The BBC is charged with providing news services in accordance with the UK’s

Royal Charter and the public service broadcasting framework. The Royal Charter

sets out the aims of the BBC (see Appendix B),71 guarantees the corporation’s

independence and provides the UK public with ‘the best possible value for money in

return for the licence fee they pay’” (Vagg, Guest, & Reid, 2010: 2). The largest part

of the BBC’s funding model consists of a television licence fee paid by each UK

household. Other sources of income include advertising revenue generated from the

international BBC Online community.

106

The BBC is managed by an Executive Board, which is responsible for delivering the

organisation’s services, while the BBC Trust sets the corporation’s strategic direction

and imposes measures to ensure that it upholds its values and functions as prescribed

in the Royal Charter. Operating independently from the BBC Executive, the Trust

develops policies and sets guidelines for the Corporation’s codes of conduct and

practice. It develops the Corporation’s objectives and formally assesses proposals

affecting its services as they arise. The BBC’s performance is reviewed by the Trust

every five years to monitor and measure its progress, and to ensure it is meeting its

aim to fulfill its public purposes. It also commissions independent research to

investigate what the UK public wants and needs as part of its effort to ensure the

BBC provides the right services for its licence fee payers (British Broadcasting

Corporation, 2013b). A Trust work plan is published at the beginning of every

financial year to provide the public with an overview of the planned activities. 72

The Trust also oversees the Corporation’s editorial guidelines, acting as an arbiter on

complaints. In addition, it sets the BBC’s commercial operations, all of which are

required to fit with the Corporation’s purpose, demonstrate commercial efficiency,

uphold the BBC brand and avoid distorting the market (British Broadcasting

Corporation, 2013b). While the BBC is not permitted to show advertising or

sponsorship in the UK (British Broadcasting Corporation, 2010d), it can provide

commercial advertisements to international audiences to offset the fact that those

outside of the UK do not contribute licence fees. The decision to show international

visitors commercial content was made in 2007 on the basis that the BBC’s global

community should “support the costs of the international distribution of that content”

(British Broadcasting Corporation, 2007b; Sambrook, 2008). This decision initially

caused some concern that the standard of BBC journalism would be compromised, if

not reduced to a spectacle, in the interest of meeting the needs of advertisers

(Standage et al., 2011). However, in keeping with its national policy of independence

and impartiality, the organisation assured the international community that

advertising would not “have any bearing on the news, information or programme

content or create the impression of endorsement by the BBC” (British Broadcasting

Corporation, 2010f). Stories carrying advertisements for international readers are

exactly the same as those without advertisements inside the UK, “the journalism is

107

the same public service you get whether inside or outside of Britain” (Sambrook,

2008).

The unique nature of the BBC as a directly publicly funded and totally independent

enterprise means it is not compelled to put advertising interests ahead of editorial

values, which therefore enables its journalism to maintain its fundamental role in

British democracy. BBC journalism aims to:

• Provide accurate, impartial and balanced coverage of news and current affairs

to assist the public in making informed choices;

• Report the proceedings of the political process in the UK and internationally;

and

• Stimulate the public debate on a range of social, political and other current

affairs issues (British Broadcasting Corporation, 2004: 2), (British

Broadcasting Corporation, 2007a).

Equality of Access

The BBC is legally obligated to ensure equality of access as a means to

comprehensively serve the UK public interest. Paddy Scannell describes this

“principle of universal availability” (Scannell, 1989: 137) as a shared quality of

public broadcasting which he describes as “a public good that has unobtrusively

contributed to the democratization of everyday life, in public and private contexts,

from its beginning through to today” (Scannell, 1989: 136). BBC Interactivity editor

Vicky Taylor says, “journalism has a big role to play in making democracy open to

everybody” (Taylor, 2008). In keeping with this obligation, the BBC creates and

hosts a variety of interactive and deliberative environments that are accessible to all

licence holders. Ordinarily, news media institutions do not consider finding solutions

to these kinds of problems as part of their remit, however for the BBC it is a

fundamental obligation.

One of its earliest attempts to address this issue was the creation of an online

community space, iCan,73 where people were invited to engage with others on

agenda topics of their own choice (Taylor, 2008). Wired reporter, Kari Lynn Dean,

saw this BBC initiative as a way of mobilising people to actively engage with their

communities74 and as a way for individuals to draw the attention of government

108

officials to their personal concerns about everyday life in their communities, such as

“maternity rights, street cleaning and bicycle lanes” (Dean, 2003). At the time, Dean

saw the potential for the issues raised by residents on iCan to develop into grassroots

campaigns, which might then be widely debated in the national news media and

ultimately lead to national legislation (Dean, 2003).

However, there was some concern about the BBC’s desire to ensure the topics of

discussion were positioned around local rather than international issues, especially

since international topics have the potential to elicit diverse political viewpoints. For

example, at that time the impending war in Iraq was generating a lot of political

debate as the country considered its role in the “coalition of the willing” 75

(Schifferes, 2003). The BBC could not and did not want to be seen to be mobilising

support for one ideological perspective over another. However, Headshift’s Lee

Bryant held a different view to the idea of keeping it local, arguing “in the age of

globalisation and interdependence” (Bryant, 2003) the issues explored by iCan

should include international topics.

There were also questions raised about the ethics of using public money to subsidise

what may be perceived as “online advocacy” (Bryant, 2003), however while this was

an acknowledged “grey area” (Bryant, 2003) Bryant believed that if iCan could help

people to navigate the Web, then it would be a beneficial public service.

The BBC’s role in familiarising and teaching the public what it needed to know to

effectively use Web 2.0 technologies shows a much more comprehensive approach

to social inclusion and participatory communication than simply constructing a

website and filling it with information. It exemplifies the organisation’s

understanding that those without access to the necessary online communication skills

are at risk of exclusion from important cultural elements of society (Kreisler, 2001:

6; Meikle, 2003).

The need for the BBC to continue its efforts to reduce the barriers preventing people

from using the Internet as a channel for engagement with news was reiterated in

2005 when its own research identified media literacy problems that limited and/or

prevented people’s civic participation (British Broadcasting Corporation, 2004) and

109

again in a 2006 Ofcom (UK Office of Communication) report that identified the need

to boost the levels of digital media literacy in the UK (Ofcom Media, 2006: 4). The

BBC is now firmly tasked with helping audiences critically engage with media and,

where possible, help them “respond and interact with it” (British Broadcasting

Corporation, 2007c: 1). While the iCan project has run its course, a more

contemporary example of its education programs about modern technology is BBC

Click,76 which provides its audience with a wide range of information that helps

individuals to understand and effectively navigate the World Wide Web and mobile

digital platforms.

Research and Development

Research and development activities within the organisation are constitutional

requirements of the “Royal Charter and by the legal agreement between the BBC and

the government” (2013a).77 BBC Online is guided by continuing research and

development into innovative ways to engage citizens with public affairs, covering

both organisational and professional spheres of development.

At the organisational level, it has implemented a number of initiatives, including the

creation of a new audience community called Global Minds, which has been

operational since 2009. This initiative aims to provide editors with a more in-depth

understanding of the diversity of the global audience. The global community, which

encompasses audience members of multiple news services such as BBC World News,

the BBC World Service, and BBC Online, is invited to provide feedback on ways to

improve BBC news services, new programme ideas, and current programmes and

web pages. The initiative provides platforms such as a blog78 and comment forums

for participants to express their views directly to editorial teams and “help shape the

BBC’s output” (Watkinson, 2009). It guarantees participants:

“You’ll be able to take part in fun and innovative ways to review our

programmes and web pages, chat directly with our editors, programme

makers and commissioners in our community, as well as meeting and

interacting with other BBC news consumers from across the world.

You’ll also get previews of BBC material, and the chance to submit

110

questions for our interview and debate programmes, as well as read

exclusive blogs from our editorial teams” (Watkinson, 2009).

In addition, the Global Minds team sends regular newsletters to participants

providing updates on what they have learnt from the participant community. This

initiative is an example of the BBC’s inclusiveness of public needs and opinion, and

of its flexibility in setting program agendas. It exemplifies one of the ways in which

it attempts to build strong relationships with the audience. It also shows that the BBC

tries to find the most innovative and effective ways to frame and contextualise what

Conboy refers to as “genuine public issues” (Conboy, 2006 as cited in Hampton

2009: 8). Moreover, it assists with the production of better-targeted and more skilful

journalism, which therefore improves its accessibility to the broader audience.

From a professional practice perspective, the BBC College of Journalism (CoJo) is

part of the framework that ensures the BBC maintains its uniform commitment to

quality. Following the Hutton Inquiry79 and Neil report,80 BBC journalism was found

to have an imbalance between the vocational and policy elements of its journalism

education program. Up to this time, the BBC’s professional development program

concentrated more on practical skills such as teaching journalists how to edit audio

and video, with less emphasis on the editorial values, standards and principles

needed to support the editorial judgments and decisions journalists were required to

make in a range of very complex environments, such as the Middle East or European

politics (Sambrook, 2008). Following the recommendations from each of the

inquiries into BBC journalism, much of the organisation’s education program now

focuses on editorial policy including law and ethics, and to a lesser degree on

practical training. The program is comprised of face-to-face workshops, and a series

of online modules presented by high-level editors and correspondents, which provide

busy staff members with the flexibility to complete the modules via their desktops at

anytime.81 Sambrook says, “We put as much effort into making one of those training

modules as we would into our output”, which he says, “is how you get the staff

engaged and interested” (Sambrook, 2008).

Additionally, once every year the BBC offers a limited number of its senior

journalists the opportunity to undertake Journalism Fellowships at the University of

111

Michigan and Reuters at Oxford. The BBC sees the four-month research

placements82 as a way for its journalists to develop “a broader perspective, nurture

intellectual growth, and inspire personal transformation” (Baker, 2013). Furthermore,

it is part of the BBC’s strategy to ensure that all aspects of BBC journalism remain at

the cutting edge of discussion and debate about journalism.

CoJo also regularly holds “Analysis and Research” briefings that provide its editors

and journalists with key points of information on hot topic issues, such as the Middle

East and the Global Economic Crisis. Guest speakers, from both inside and outside

of the BBC, are invited to present their field of expertise, providing staff with a

diversity of important background information. This practice demonstrates BBC

journalism’s commitment to providing authoritative and accurate accounts of news

and events (as described by Bender et al. (Bender et al., 2009: 5)) since it serves to

equip journalists with the information they require to critically analyse information,

to identify propaganda and to uncover the truth in a fast paced digital news

environment. Kovach and Rosenstiel stress that it is an important requirement of the

verification process that journalists are equipped with the intellect that enables them

to test the “veracity and coherence” of “purported facts” (Kovach & Rosenstiel,

2001) when evaluating information. News briefings such as those provided by the

BBC help journalists to avoid unquestioning acceptance of information from

journalism’s traditional sources that may lead to manipulation and unnecessary

conflict (McChesney, 2011).

The Primary Role of BBC Journalism

The role of BBC journalism is to “shine light on what is happening” (Taylor, 2008)

to stimulate the public debate on a range of social and political current affairs

(British Broadcasting Corporation, 2007c). Taylor says that while the newsroom is

not responsible for whether individuals vote, it does have an obligation to provide the

public with information and a depth of knowledge about public interest issues,

presented in an interesting way. As such, BBC journalism aims to reflect knowledge

arising from individuals’ personal experience for the purpose of helping the public

learn what others think, thereby providing them with the opportunity to develop a

broader view of the world (Taylor, 2008).83 This resolves with theorists who argue

that people develop and understand their personal and collective identity through

112

their relationships with others, an important facet of deliberative democracy

(Gimmler, 2001: 24; Mansbridge, 1999: 47; Rosenstiel, 2009a). In keeping with the

theoretical perspectives of the Fourth Estate, which view news media as a watchdog

that monitors government activities in the interest of the public (Hampton, 2009: 4),

Taylor says the more information people have to back up their thoughts, the better

equipped they are to question people in authority (Taylor, 2008).

The BBC’s public purpose and its journalistic aim to stimulate the public debate in

interesting and engaging ways have remained constant since its earliest beginnings

(Born, 2004). The use of Web 2.0 technologies has added new opportunities for news

producers to innovate, create and discover new interactive methods of fostering

citizen engagement with the diversity and complexity of social, political and

economic aspects of day-to-day issues and events.

Broadcast News: Transition Online

“Online journalism is still journalism; it’s not a different thing that we

have created” (Taylor, 2008).

Described as the BBC’s “third medium” (Highfield, 2006), the online environment

has become an “essential resource” (Highfield, 2006) in the organisation’s mission to

provide UK licence fee payers with an engaging, interactive and participatory public

service. In keeping with its remit “to bring the UK to the world and the world to the

UK” (British Broadcasting Corporation, 2013c) the BBC provides worldwide access

to its network of multi-media platforms, where it brings continuous news about

“major international issues to the attention of broad audience” (British Broadcasting

Corporation, 2013c). BBC News uses the online environment––BBC Online––to

provide the world with a global news service to contextualise what is important to

the UK, and to increase the UK public’s knowledge about the events and issues

important to other societies in the world, thereby broadening the UK’s exposure to

different national cultures, and vice versa (British Broadcasting Corporation, 2013c).

The website receives ten million visitors every week, making it the most popular

news site in the UK, with 60–70 percent of its visitors coming from within the UK.

Approximately 500 stories are covered on the website everyday, 100 of which are

video stories while the remaining 400 are text (S. Herrmann, 2012b).

113

The BBC’s Director of Future Media Ralph Rivera describes the convergence of

broadcast and online as a constantly evolving process, which thus far has been

defined by three distinct phases. Phase one was the launch of the online environment

in December 1997 to market BBC television programs.84 The second phase saw it

putting what was on television, online; then the third phase used online to provide an

extension of what was happening on television. Finally, Rivera anticipates the BBC

will eventually become “natively online” (Rivera, 2011).

Figure 4.1. An interpretation of the convergence of broadcast and online as described by BBC

Director Future Media Ralph Rivera.

BBC Online began with a team dedicated to working on Internet initiatives, one that

worked separately from its radio and television newsrooms. Originally a read-only

site, by 2001 it had relaunched as BBCi to reflect the interactive services it provided,

“bringing together BBC Online, BBC text and BBC Interactive under a single

identity” (British Broadcasting Corporation, 2001). The interactive services offered

in 2001 enabled users to interact with some digital television programs to gain “on

screen information and links about the programme, as well as the latest news,

weather and sport” (British Broadcasting Corporation, 2001). The success of this

initiative was an indication that the use of digital environments had the capacity to

increase and enhance the organisation’s efforts to interact with audiences. With that

in mind, it began developing its use of a diversity of media communication channels,

such as message boards, chat rooms, live forums (British Broadcasting Corporation,

2001), blogs, consumer content creation (2013a: 9), and most recently social media.

114

Each online channel of communication provides culturally diverse publics with a

choice of deliberative spaces where individuals are free to engage with the wide-

ranging opinions of others through dialogue. While the BBC is aware that its entire

audience does not have the motivation to actively participate in all of its online

initiatives, these channels of communication are deployed to encourage people to

harness engagement with public affairs.85

By 2006, a significant culture shift brought about by the new online environment,

and shaped by the rapid and popular uptake of social sites such as Flickr, YouTube

and Second Life, left the BBC in no doubt that the public, no longer a passive

audience, was well on its way to taking control of creating content. Equipped with

this knowledge, the BBC adapted its service to try to incorporate ideas that enabled it

to “reach beyond traditional [broadcast] audiences” (Highfield, 2006). Following

almost ten years of successful online initiatives, it integrated its television, radio and

online services and ran them in the one place, thereby replacing three separate news

desks with one (Sambrook, 2008). This restructure would solidify the foundations for

the BBC to continue its move forward into the online environment (S. Herrmann,

2012a).

In addition to joining the newsrooms in one location, the leadership and structure of

daily operations also changed. Before the restructure, each newsroom, television,

radio and online, would hold their own editorial meetings, of which there were many,

and each kept the proceedings undisclosed from the other newsrooms because each

platform was to some extent competing with the other. The move to co-location

brought with it a new meeting regime, which comprised of an additional meeting in

the morning, led by the Head of Global News, that included all of the key editors,

and required everyone to participate in the discussions, and to share information (S.

Herrmann, 2012a). The key objectives of this amalgamation were to encourage the

“trade and transfer of skills and of editorial agenda”, to “integrate the Internet into

the main newsrooms”, and to create “a multimedia news room under one common

editorial framework and oversight” (Sambrook, 2008).

Herrmann said the new structure required platforms to swap skills and skill building

practices, attachments, secondments and training programs (S. Herrmann, 2012a). A

115

new position was created for one “editor-in-chief of the day” (Sambrook, 2008)

across radio, television and online, instead of the previous three, who sometimes

took different views about priorities. The duties of this position were fulfilled by

each of the output editors86 who were required to take responsibility for the whole

newsroom on a daily rotational basis, which meant they had to make decisions about

programs; stories, which ones to run, assess the associated risks, the running order,

and follow their progress; ensure BBC standards were maintained; and deal with the

talent, presenters and others in the BBC hierarchy (Marsh, 2006). The idea to rotate

the editors negated any concerns that replacement of three editorial viewpoints with

one would narrow the perspective of BBC News. Instead, the restructure resulted in

better co-ordination rather than homogeneity (S. Herrmann, 2012a). The change at

this time required an ample supply of multi-media skills in the newsroom, some of

which already existed and some of which would be developed with time (Sambrook,

2008).

BBC Newsroom Workflow

Figure 4.2 shows the early incorporation of the online production team into the BBC

newsroom workflow. The process began with a news agenda set by editors who then

allocated stories to various news gathering teams, which included television and

radio crews, foreign correspondents and specialist reporters. Content was gathered on

the selected issues and events and distributed to radio and television production

teams. This content then flowed through to the appropriate broadcast channels and to

the Interactive team, which reproduced the content for the online site,

bbc.co.uk/news

116

Figure 4.2. The original workflow incorporating the online production team as an add-on.

In 2008, the BBC remodelled its newsroom to better accommodate the changed news

production workflow.87The new multimedia newsroom converged the new online

with the traditional television and radio newsgathering teams. The convergence of

multiple media platforms into the one area aimed to provide a more efficient and

productive way of gathering, packaging and presenting news. Where the Interactivity

team was originally included as an add-on to the end of the workflow, the new

arrangement saw it feed the traditional broadcast teams with editorialised user-

generated content (see Figure 4.3), which indicates that it had become a valuable and

integral part of the news production process.

117

Figure 4.3. The workflow of the multimedia newsroom incorporating the News Interactive team at the

start of the news production process.

Editorial Values

BBC journalism is founded on five key values, each consistent with normative

theories of journalism: truth and accuracy; to serve the public interest; to ensure

impartiality and a diversity of opinion; to remain independent; and to be accountable

(British Broadcasting Corporation, 2004: 10). Steve Herrmann attributes the success

of BBC news to its journalism pedigree and to the considerable resources it has

access to (S. Herrmann, 2012b). News is delivered through two divisions: BBC News

(national and global services) and BBC Nations & Regions (local and regional

services). With news bureaux in 41 countries (Van Klaveren),88 the BBC is not

reliant on external agencies for reports, which allows the news provider to

contextualise events and issues with a unique and authoritative voice.

118

The use of interactive and participatory tools and technologies of journalism

provides for a more social style and practice of news reporting. In 2012, Herrmann

told an Online News Association conference that he believed the newsroom’s use of

citizen-produced content served to strengthen its journalism (S. Herrmann, 2012b).

BBC News is, in part, guided by information and content it receives from the

audience when setting its news agenda. The newsroom gets a sense of what people

are most interested in, and the most popular debates, by looking at the wide range of

viewpoints contributed by the public (Taylor, 2008). Sambrook (2008) qualifies this

by saying that it sometimes happens that the biggest and most important issue is not

necessarily the story that generates the most public interest, and where this occurs he

emphasises that that does not cause the BBC to back away from it. He says the BBC

has an obligation as a publicly funded organisation to identify, present and explain

the important and significant issues (those that “form the shared basis for political

conversation and broad social relations” (Benkler, 2006: 29)) in an interesting way,

even where it may not have registered with the public as a popular topic. The BBC’s

approach to journalism distinguishes it from other sources of news, in that it aims to

understand audience interest but is not led by it (Sambrook, 2008). In this vein, BBC

News is not cluttered with, or dominated by, the latest celebrity saga. With that said,

it treats absolutely everything it intends to publish with the same journalistic rigour,

“we ask the right questions, we check that pictures are not already out there on the

wires, and we never take things on face value” (Taylor, 2008).89

The public broadcaster now engages in a wide range of collaborative processes with

the audience, which includes the incorporation of citizen produced content, comment

and sometimes crowdsourced analysis, therefore editors are acutely aware of the

need for rigorous methods of verification, comment moderation, filtering, screening

and editing, and finally the importance of the professional production skills required

to convert raw content into interesting and contextualised content (Taylor, 2008).

While there is little doubt about the value of the Web to facilitate interactive

relationships between news organisations and the public for the production of

journalism (Jarvis, 2010), many news organisations, including the BBC, have

identified the numerous complexities it introduces. Moreover, as both Herrmann and

Dahlgren point out, different newsrooms use particular technologies in different

119

ways, and their approach is predominantly determined by the aims and objectives of

particular newsrooms (P. Dahlgren, 1996: 60; S. Herrmann, 2012b), which

corresponds with the aim of this thesis to show a range of different approaches by

different models of news media.

As this chapter has so far described, by 2008 the BBC had already made a significant

effort to adapt to, evolve with, and develop its journalism, using the tools and

technologies of the Internet, with consistent focus on public needs. In 2008,

Sambrook observed a considerable amount of apprehensiveness amongst some

editors in key news organisations about using Web 2.0 tools and technologies for

journalism, even though these had already begun to have an impact on the broader

business, cultural and practical elements of journalism. At about the same time,

Philip Meyer warned it was now more important than ever before for news

organisations to realise the value of Web 2.0 technologies to their role as news

providers. Further, the use of the Web provides newsrooms with greater scope to

access a wider network of sources of information, which includes the public, to help

them filter and verify content. This practice ultimately has the capacity to improve

their journalism and enhance their relationship with the community (P. Meyer,

2008).

4.2 Technologies of Journalism: New Participatory and

Deliberative Spaces

The use of Web 2.0 technologies is transforming traditional journalism into a much

more interactive and networked practice than in the past. In 2008, Richard Sambrook

identified four distinct ways in which the BBC’s use of Web 2.0 technologies had

already changed the technologies of journalism in the newsroom. First, he noted that

even though BBC journalism had always been inclusive of the audience, Web 2.0

technologies had thus far provided the newsroom with more tools and greater scope

to develop new techniques and opportunities to expand its connection with more of

the audience. The use of digital technologies created more opportunities for BBC

News to reflect the public’s shared experiences across multiple platforms.

120

Then, while much of the traditional news media continued to cling to the view that

news organisations ought to be the gatekeepers of information and that audiences

were passive, Sambrook said that BBC News was acutely aware that audiences

sought active engagement, and that there would always be people outside of the

newsroom who knew more about particular topics than journalists. In this vein, the

BBC comfortably recognised the value of using online news platforms to harness and

share audience knowledge and opinion.

Thirdly, he said the Web had provided the newsroom with a new environment for

breaking news, and finally, he said it had fundamentally assisted and enhanced the

practice and progress of networked journalism (Sambrook, 2008). The BBC was, at

that time, well on its way to incorporating a wide range of Web 2.0 tools and

technologies into the ways in which it gathered information, and produced and

distributed journalism.

Networked Journalism

“Some people think audience input only matters when there is a big event

such as the London bombings or the 2004 Tsunami, however that is

absolutely not what happens” (Taylor, 2008).

BBC News encourages audience engagement with all of its services and participation

on all of its platforms. As described in Chapter 3, networked journalism manifests as

the convergence of traditional with digital tools and technologies of journalism. This

better equips the newsroom for the formation of partnerships and collaborations

between professional, independent and citizen informants.

Sambrook describes the practice of networked journalism as the “sharing of

expertise” (Sambrook, 2008). In 2008, he observed that the wider profession was yet

to broadly adopt the idea of networked journalism, however he expected it would

become general practice in the future. The terms interactivity and networked

journalism are now increasingly used in discussions about journalism.

121

Chapters 1 and 2 identified the cultural shift that has occurred in the domain of news

journalism and how that has affected the way that news organisations, and society

more generally, think about the role of the public in the news process. The realisation

that news media are no longer the gatekeepers of information and the public is no

longer a passive audience may have arrived a little earlier for the BBC than some

other organisations. As it happens, the qualities and competencies of Web 2.0

technologies align well with the BBC’s strategies to fulfil the requirements of its

Charter. While BBC News has always understood the value of being open and

inclusive of a diversity of opinion and expertise, its use of Web 2.0 technologies now

allows interactivity to happen on “an exponentially greater scale” (Sambrook, 2008).

From the earliest beginnings of the BBC’s use of Web 2.0 technologies, the

organisation tasked itself with finding, developing and applying the tools and

technologies that would help its journalists reach out to the public through the digital

environment. Considering this as one of its most important undertakings in the

digital era, Sambrook said provided it was done right, the application of Web 2.0

technologies to journalism practice would “only improve the quality of BBC

journalism” (Sambrook, 2008).

The BBC uses multiple methods to gather news and generate conversations that are

in the public interest. Taylor says it works continuously, compiling case studies,

sorting, verifying and cataloguing, to find, monitor and present ordinary stories, not

only those that are internationally well-known, but also everyday local stories

(Taylor, 2008). Using a range of platforms, it informs the public that it is

investigating a particular topic or issue and appeals to individuals to share their

experiences and thoughts. For example, a story of the day at the BBC might be about

the National Health Service (NHS); people may feel the service is not adequate for

their needs. Or they may feel the banks are not treating them well; perhaps they

cannot get a mortgage. In the past, journalists would have phoned media groups,

charities, Non-Government Organisations (NGO’s) and banking organisations to

build case studies on these issues (Taylor, 2008). Now, using a range of Web 2.0

technologies to create multiple entry points to a diversity of conversations in a

variety of online spaces,90 the BBC encourages the public to use these tools to

communicate with each other and with journalists, thereby drawing out a wide range

122

of ideas and opinion. Taylor says these methods provide for a much more authentic

case study, “one that is not mediated by private interests” (Taylor, 2008).

BBC News has thousands of case studies on a variety of issues that it can continually

build and draw from. It maintains a database that holds all audience contacts,

expertise, and experience, which is used in the production of stories and programs

(Sambrook, 2008). Once a relationship is established between the BBC and

individual members of the public, through interviews or content creation, most

people are happy to allow journalists to follow up on their situation and they are

generally much more open (Eltringham, 2008). While the Internet presents many

opportunities for more open relationships between journalists and the public, BBC

journalists do not accept information at face value. The need to apply professional

journalistic processes and standards to the production of news remains as important

now as it was in the past (Sambrook, 2008).

The BBC often sources information from external specialist blogs. Where a blog

presents particular information of interest to the BBC, the journalist will contact the

blogger and, as part of the news gathering process, will verify the author’s sources.

The blog may be incorporated into the story or the blogger may be asked to write

something for the BBC. Specialist blogs in places where the BBC does not have

expertise on the ground, such as Burma or Zimbabwe, provide the greatest value to

the news service. BBC News specialists provide the newsroom with advice about

which expert blogs are valuable and reliable for collaboration (Eltringham, 2008).

The Internet adds a further dimension to newsgathering where it enables journalists

to circumvent political protocols that limit access to information. Before the

availability of Web 2.0 technologies, journalists were largely dependent upon official

military and government channels for information about wars. The method used by

journalists to access information about the war in Iraq followed traditional routines

until a BBC News team, frustrated by the limitations of these, took a different and

modernised approach to gathering information. Kevin Anderson, a former BBC

journalist, recalled the difficulties that all reporters experienced as they attempted to

gain access to the soldiers in Iraq. News organisations were required to go through

the official channels controlled by the Pentagon, which was often complicated and

123

time consuming. Frustrated by these restrictions, the BBC news team took a step

outside of the traditional boundaries defined for war reportage, and referred instead

to the technologies of the Web to find different ways to access the information the

public needed to know about the war. Given that the capacities of interactive Web

technologies were still in the early stages of being realised, the idea that soldiers in

Iraq would use personal blogs, and then the idea to search the network of blogs for

them, then search the pages of the blogs for email addresses, was for that time,

innovative. For this particular news team, their efforts were successful when they

managed to make direct contact with three soldiers serving at the centre of the

international military presence in Baghdad, a place known as the Green Zone. They

made arrangements with the soldiers to interview them live for a BBC World Service

broadcast (K. Anderson, 2008).

When the program finished, producers of another BBC news program expressed their

surprise that this team had gotten unprecedented access, moreover to hear how they

got it, “we emailed them; we found their email addresses on their blogs and that was

all there was to it” (K. Anderson, 2008). Kevin Anderson described this kind of

reporting as “first person, experiential, on the ground context” (K. Anderson, 2008).

The soldiers in the Green Zone ran personal blogs simply as a way to stay in touch

with their families and friends at home. They were not trying to establish themselves

as citizen journalists, instead they used the blog platform to provide their loved ones

with regular updates on what was happening to them––simple things like what they

had for dinner––and to provide reassurances of their safety. When established news

media discovered their blogs, journalists were able to filter, evaluate and produce

gathered information, and help the soldiers to share their first person experiences of

the war in real time with the BBC’s international audience.

While the practice of using blogs to find contact details and other information has

since evolved to become a commonplace approach to newsgathering, in 2006 it was

considered innovative. At the time, it challenged both the dominant professional

practice of journalism, and its political and social order. Following Castells’

assertion that technology is mutually shaped by a range of social and political forces

(Van Dijck, 2011: 344), the methods described by Anderson served to reshape the

tools, technologies and politics of journalism. Moreover, it exemplifies Bardoel and

124

Deuze’s description of “the convergence between the core competences and

functions of journalists and the civic potential of online journalism” (Bardoel &

Deuze, 2001: 2). Anderson said BBC journalists took the same approach with

dissident journalists in Iran, cyber dissidents in China, and with people who were

rushing to provide relief services after the earthquake in Kashmir. He said there was

a misconception at the time that access to Web 2.0 technology was largely confined

to the developed world, that it was not in general use in Africa or the remote parts of

Asia, for example. He said, his experience showed that was not true (K. Anderson,

2008). For Anderson, the use of Web 2.0 technologies to report the news of the

world simply “adds another layer of richness over the top of what is still very much

traditional journalism” (K. Anderson, 2008). Journalists still have to verify all of

their sources, ensure they are not being fed information to serve factional interests,

and to abide by the traditional ethics of journalism.

The BBC receives a lot of emails, videos and still pictures of news events that people

have witnessed and wish to share (Sambrook, 2008). The Internet has opened up

global channels of communication, not only for people who are experiencing the

huge news events, but also the people who are right at the centre of something

happening to them. Like Anderson, Taylor and Sambrook agree that the content

generated through these channels gives news reports a deeper representation of

personal experience (K. Anderson, 2008; Sambrook, 2008) and it is much more

direct than traditional methods of gathering information (Taylor, 2008). Where in the

past reporters could only follow-up on a few letters from the public, the BBC now

interacts instantly with thousands of contributors every day. Consistent with

McQuail’s (2008: 52) emphasis on the importance for news media to connect people

on the basis of their shared experience, Sambrook (2008) says the use of Internet

technology means people can now see more of their experiences being reflected in

BBC programs than ever before.

New Tools and Technologies of Journalism to Share Opinion

BBC Online enables the public to share opinion via the BBC blog network, the Have

Your Say program and message boards. More recently, this practice has expanded to

platforms external to the BBC, including Facebook, Google+, Twitter, Flickr and

125

YouTube. BBC News incorporates and reflects comment and opinion expressed in

these platforms within its news programs.

The program World Have Your Say takes a topic and actively canvasses its global

audience around that subject. Some news organisations have reservations about such

practices because they are worried about the expression of public opinion. However,

the principle of this practice is no different to a radio phone-in program, since it

allows the public to express opinions about the news within a particular framework,

and the same can be true of blogs (Sambrook, 2008). “I don’t think there is anything

new about that, but the technology enables it to happen in new ways” (Sambrook,

2008).

Television and radio news programs can now ask audiences to participate in the

interview process by asking them to send the questions they want answered by those

in authority directly to the person producing the interview. While the political

interview has long been a site of contention in debates about journalism practice

(Schudson, 2006), the BBC technique provides the public with an opportunity to

directly challenge those in authority (Taylor, 2008). Schudson argues that journalists,

in their quest to uphold the notion of objectivity, are sometimes accused of bias and

being fixated on conflict. They are also blamed for representing politicians and

politics from a cynical perspective (Keating, 2012). Moreover, bias and conflict are

seen to have the capacity to contribute to public disengagement with public affairs.

The BBC’s interactive approach to interviews has the facility to reduce the common

perceptions of political bias, cynicism and conflict generated by many political

interviews (Schudson, 2006). It is a way of gathering more information than it may

otherwise have obtained through traditional channels. As a complement to the

traditional interview process, it provides refined detail about what is important to

members of the community (Niles, 2007). Now routinely used in the day-to-day

practice of newsgathering, Taylor says, “people no longer accept the old fashioned

method where the presenter asks questions, and what they say is what you get”

(Taylor, 2008).

126

Creating a New Environment for Breaking News

News can now be uncovered and broken by any one of the many independent news

sites in the new online-networked environment. Using the same principles and values

of traditional newsgathering, the BBC reports those stories in the same way that it

reports traditional sources of news (Sambrook, 2008). Taylor says, because of this,

things cannot be hidden from the public anymore. The Internet opens the window to

what is happening in the world. Authentic stories from individuals from Zimbabwe,

or Iraq, or wherever it may be, tell us what is really happening (Taylor, 2008).

The same applies on a local scale. For example, a story about a UK supermarket

selling contaminated fuel was quickly brought to the attention of the general public

via the BBC’s online community (Taylor, 2008). While a story such as this may have

traditionally taken days to come to the public’s attention, the use of Internet

technology, crowdsourcing techniques and traditional methods of journalistic

investigation combined to enable the BBC to quickly identify the source and location

of contaminated fuel.

The contaminated fuel story began when members of the public began to email the

BBC with reports that their cars were breaking down after refuelling at a particular

service station. The number of emails received prompted the news service to post an

article on its website asking: “Has your car been affected” (Taylor, 2008). Within

thirty minutes, the BBC received two hundred emails in response to the question, and

so it began to deepen its investigation (Taylor, 2008). Reporters telephoned Tesco,

which initially denied all knowledge of the complaints, and refuted the claims. When

the BBC was eventually in receipt of thousands of emails, all of which were isolated

to a specific geographic location, the overwhelming evidence sent the BBC back to

Tesco, which then conceded: “Ah yes, there is contamination in some of the fuel in

that part of the country” (Taylor, 2008). This example shows it is now much more

difficult for stories to go underground (Taylor, 2008) and illustrates that the BBC’s

uses of the new tools and technologies of journalism enhances its ability to fulfil its

role as the Fourth Estate.

127

Crowdsourcing

The BBC used crowdsourcing techniques during the 2004 US presidential election

campaign to engage national and international audiences with its coverage and to

discover the issues that were of most concern to everybody. It began by asking radio

listeners what they wanted to know about the US election. Then, taking Surowiecki’s

“grass roots approach” (Surowiecki, 2005), its US correspondents spent five days

travelling by road across America talking face-to-face with members of the public

about what was important to them. The information gleaned was used to produce

daily webcasts addressing a range of location specific issues (K. Anderson, 2008).

The significance of this method was threefold. First, it moved away from the

traditional journalistic practice that primarily sourced information from authoritative

institutions such as government, non-government and business. Second, listening to

the concerns of individuals gave journalists a better idea and understanding of what

the real issues were, enabled them to better contextualise stories, and to make them

more relevant and accessible to the broader audience. Finally, the online daily

distribution of news content meant information could be instantly shared with the

world, and it enabled citizens across the US to consider the similarities and

differences between their individual life experience and the experiences of others.

This example illustrates how the BBC’s use of Web 2.0 based tools and technologies

with traditional methods of journalism during its coverage of the US election

campaign, created a structure in which individuals could raise issues and consider

their life experience of a range of political principles that have the capacity to either

serve or weaken their individual and community interests (Van Dijck, 2011: 344).

The BBC used crowdsourcing techniques on a large scale again in 2009 when it was

discovered that some Members of the UK Parliament had misused their

parliamentary expense accounts. The BBC drew on the collective intelligence of the

UK constituencies to review and analyse the vast number of documents pertaining to

MP expense claims. The BBC coverage began with a story on the main news

website, news.bbc.co.uk, entitled “MPs’ Expenses Made Public Online”. The article

reported that following a lengthy Freedom of Information (FOI) application, all

expense claims made by every British MP in the past four years would be published

for all constituents to see and analyse. The publication of vast amounts of

information was not possible prior to the availability of, and access to, Web 2.0

128

technologies. Some details on the claims, such as addresses, were blacked out where

they were likely to impact on privacy and security. At the time of publication, several

MPs had already either stepped down from their positions or agreed to repay their

debt.

The BBC created a number of entry points to the task, encouraging everyone who

wanted to participate to do so. It created multiple online news articles and broadcast

reports on the topic, encouraged citizens to engage with comment forums, and

enabled email interaction between editors and citizens. Overall, the collective of

participatory sites generated a broad range of responses to an array of complex

issues.91

Interactivity and User-generated Content

When BBC Online began, journalists were initially sceptical about the value of the

untried platform for news.92 As the advantages and complexities of producing and

distributing news in this environment became clearer, attitudes changed (Eltringham,

2008). More specifically, as the interactive capacities of online journalism were

realised the platform became crucial to the BBC’s purpose. By 2008, it was well

established that the public had become active participants in the news, “without them

we couldn’t do what we do” (Taylor, 2008). At this time, there were significantly

fewer people participating in the various interactive activities than there were

reading, however, by 2012 a BBC study found that participation in the UK digital

environment had become a mainstream activity with over three quarters of the online

public being active. Participation comprised of discussions about general topics and

what people saw on television, and photo sharing (Goodier, 2012).

Helen Boaden says the BBC uses “citizen newsgathering” to enhance traditional

news journalism, “Our journalism is now fully embracing the experiences of our

audiences, sharing their stories, using their knowledge and hosting their opinions;

we're acting as a conduit between different parts of our audience; and we're being

more open and transparent than we have ever been” (Boaden, 2008).

The BBC has a specific team of journalists who are responsible for managing the

conversation between the BBC and the audience. The Interactivity team host

129

conversations via message boards and services, such as Have Your Say, which

generate questions to encourage people to talk about their experience of the world.

Using the website facilities and email, the public is encouraged to send in the content

they have produced showing the events they have witnessed or been involved in.

Some of these events have included the social unrest in Tibet and Gaza, and the

London bombings (Eltringham, 2008).

Most people contact the BBC because they have been invited to send content

(Eltringham, 2008). “Overwhelmingly, about 98 per cent of the content comes in

because we’ve asked for it; only a very small proportion comes in unsolicited”

(Eltringham, 2008). When the BBC asks for content, a high proportion of the

audience responds. “People want to share their story and talk about their

experiences” (Eltringham, 2008). Eltringham says, given the BBC’s global reach and

reputation, “What better platform is there to share your experiences with, than the

BBC” (Eltringham, 2008). The BBC has an international reputation that people

respond to, so when social and political conflicts in places such as Burma, Kenya and

Zimbabwe arise, the people in these remote locations want to get their story out.

They want to tell the world what is happening to them (Eltringham, 2008).

Moreover, the traffic to the BBC News online increases dramatically during times of

crisis, which shows the ongoing demand for authoritative news coverage by

traditional news organisations (Doucet, 2012).

The BBC receives a diverse range of user-generated content, however it does not

publish raw content, but rather it publishes “editorialized user-generated content”

(Highfield, 2006). Shirky describes the combination of raw content with “editorial

finesse” (Shirky, 2009) for the purpose of contextualising/storifying/editorialising

the content for a mass audience, as pro-am journalism. The BBC “never publishes or

broadcasts anything without knowing for sure that it is true” (Eltringham, 2008). The

interactivity team applies a rigorous verification process to all of the incoming user-

generated content, case-by-case, to ensure the contributors are in fact who they say

they are, and that the content is authentic and relevant. When the content is verified,

it can be used across all of the organisation’s news platforms. Eltringham says the

Hub can produce almost any kind of user-generated content, from events captured

with a mobile phone, to witness accounts whereby contributors may be asked to talk

130

over video footage or a series of stills to explain what is happening (Eltringham,

2008). In instances where content shows particularly dramatic or newsworthy events,

contributors may be asked for an interview, pre-recorded or live, with World

Television or domestic television and radio. Finally, when the interactivity team has

produced the content, it is offered to programs where it may be used in a package or

sequence (Eltringham, 2008).

The BBC takes a number of things into consideration before deciding whether to

include members of the public in its programs. For example, in places of political

unrest there are issues such as whether sources or informants feel their lives may be

at risk as a result of their participation, the participant may prefer to use an

anonymised name, and, the BBC can establish that the participant is “absolutely

genuine” (Eltringham, 2008). Eltringham says, “this new relationship [with the

public] raises many questions about trust and verification and new questions of

impartiality, independence and the public interest” (Eltringham, 2008).

The inclusion of user-generated content is not considered to be a replacement for the

professionally produced content derived from the routine practices of journalism. For

the BBC, which has an obligation to support the UK’s creative industries, its use of

pictures, for example, is dependent upon the availability of professional images

(Eltringham, 2008). However, since many people now carry smart phones, the BBC

is aware that a member of the general public is most likely to record what is

happening from the scene of an event before a journalist or professional

photographer arrives (Bakhurst, 2011).

Eltringham says the first pictures from a breaking story usually come in to the

newsroom within the first thirty to forty minutes, and they are always user-generated

content. He says the good pictures, those that are very descriptive of the event—the

“money shots”—generally arrive after an hour or so and are usually taken by

eyewitnesses at the scene (Eltringham, 2008). These shots rarely come from the

professional photographers. The newsroom normally uses user-generated content to

“sustain coverage for its rolling news channel that needs to tell the story and talk

about it” (Eltringham, 2008).

131

The first time user-generated pictures were sent to the BBC from the scene of a major

crisis event was the London bombings of 2005. Photos were sent from the multiple

scenes of attack throughout London. Eltringham points out that while the BBC

managed to get authorisation from the content creators for use of the materials free of

charge, some newspapers were required to make commercial arrangements for the

same material, which he said, “shows the value and reputation that the BBC” enjoys

with the public (Eltringham, 2008). As mentioned in Chapter 2, people have different

reasons for contributing content to particular organisations. Some are motivated by

remuneration, while others are driven by more personal reasons (Coleman &

Blumler, 2009: 3). Similarly, some organisations are willing to pay for exclusive

content while some are not. In 2008, Eltringham was aware that, regardless of the

BBC’s reputation, it would most likely have to make decisions about whether to pay

for priced user-generated content in the future. “The key shots are not always worth

it” (Eltringham, 2008), therefore decisions will be made on a case-by-case basis

(Eltringham, 2008). He adds, if the BBC buys exclusive, then it may take the

opportunity to sell it on and make the money back (Eltringham, 2008).

Figure 4.4 shows one of the photos sent to the BBC by an eyewitness from the scene

of the London bombings in 2005. The value of this photograph is its power to take

the BBC audience into one of the many scenes of the event. Thousands of Londoners

were stranded in the city’s underground tunnels when the rail network was halted

following the attacks. Passengers were forced to leave trains at various places along

the track to walk, sometimes long distances, through the dark and intricate subway

network to get to the surface.

Internet technologies also provide the BBC with new ways of accessing information

from parts of the world that are politically isolated:

“There are parts of the world where we cannot possibly get conventional

journalists into, yet we can still get information from places such as

Nauru or Burma, via people who were prepared to take the time to send

the BBC information from cafes” (Eltringham, 2008).

132

Figure 4.4. A BBC video frame showing a photo, submitted to the BBC by a member of the public, of

Londoners experiencing the disruption in London Underground following the London bombings 2005

Adapted from (Bakhurst, 2011).

During the most recent uprising in Burma, the government turned off the electronic

means for external communication between the Burmese citizens and the rest of the

world when it found people were using Internet cafes to get the stories of what was

happening on their city streets into the global media. All of the cafes in Burma were

shut down and, as a result, it took the event away from the headlines at the BBC and

the rest of the world, causing the story to instantly “fall away” (Eltringham, 2008).

The BBC and other news media could not get access to any information, “it was like

turning a tap off” (Eltringham, 2008).

The BBC values the user-generated content from places it cannot reach because it

enables it to continue to produce reports that have the capacity to create a greater

global awareness of the issues and experiences of some of the people in these places

(Eltringham, 2008) Eltringham says of BBC contributors, “the people have become

another set of eyes” (Eltringham, 2008). Again, this shows the value of the tools and

technologies of journalism, enabled by the Internet, to enhance journalism’s role as

the Fourth Estate.

Talking Point and Have Your Say

Talking Point was one of the BBC’s earliest projects in user engagement. It provided

the public with the opportunity to participate in radio interviews with some of the

world’s most authoritative figures. The program presenters would ask the audience to

133

submit the questions they wanted to ask guests such as Kofi Annan or the King of

Jordan via email or SMS93 text message (K. Anderson, 2008).

Talking Point was broadcast on World Service radio and was also streamed live on

the Web. The program generated a lot of comment and information, which had to be

moderated and verified. Following the success of including public input to the

program, Paul Brannan, then deputy editor of the BBC news website, continued to

publicly emphasise, “the BBC could no longer imagine doing some of these

programs without the extra added value of content from the public” (K. Anderson,

2008). Talking Point evolved into the Have Your Say program, which, in response to

its international popularity, became World Have Your Say.

The Have Your Say program has continued into 2013. It generates debate and

conversation about important issues and, like its predecessor, assists editorial staff to

gauge the importance and/or relevance of topics to the public. Designed to be

accessible to all education levels of the general population, it is a news based

message board that specialises in showing the more colourful contributions from the

public. Editorially, it created a way for the BBC to “crowdsource” questions and to

turn the agenda over to the audience, which “expanded into user comments and some

citizen journalism” (K. Anderson, 2008).94

The Have Your Say program provides up to four topics over a period of two days to

encourage discussion and debate. People have the opportunity to say what they think

about the issues and events of the day. The BBC listens to what people want to talk

about and responds by moving stories, identified by the public as being important, up

or down the running order. The BBC, at all times, maintains control over the focus of

the discussion largely to ensure that it stays on topic and within the legal and policy

boundaries (Eltringham, 2010). The BBC’s practice exhibits the benchmark

characteristics described by Dahlgren (2001: 42-44) and Brandenburg as inclusive. It

provides access to information, allows flexibility in its agenda, provides a reasonable

amount of time for people to consider issues, and sets rules to ensure participation is

inclusive (Brandenburg, 2006: 219). In this vein, the Have Your Say program can be

viewed as one of several deliberative spaces made available to the public by the BBC

for political expression, and the sharing of information about important and

134

sometimes complex issues. While, as Gutmann and Thompson point out, deliberation

would only create public agreement on all social and political matters in an ideal

world, deliberative spaces such as Have Your Say have the capacity to make debates

more accessible and transparent (Gutmann & Thompson, 1996: 16; Held, 2006: 237).

Message Boards

Message boards are a type of forum where members of the public can discuss BBC

programs and policies. The BBC uses message boards as a way to connect with the

audience and to encourage the expression of a broad range of views across a variety

of topics. While many hold that the conversations in online forums such as message

boards and blogs are good in their own right, there is a flip side that questions their

value, given a well documented perception that a lot of public comment tends to be

“ranting” (Eltringham, 2008), which only devaluates journalism (Bailey, 2009;

Jarvis, 2010) (see Chapter 2.3). Nonetheless, the BBC believes the forums hold value

for journalism and the deliberative process (Eltringham, 2008). BBC editor Ian

Hunter contends comments on blogs, for example, “often illuminate or extend or

challenge a post in interesting ways” (I. Hunter, 2011), and therefore they have the

capacity to better engage audiences. “Engaged users come back more frequently” (I.

Hunter, 2011), which he says increases the value of the service to them. Moreover,

he argues, “richer connections with the user can help us [the BBC] be more open,

transparent and accountable” (I. Hunter, 2011). This creed ensures the BBC’s

continued efforts to try and test different methods of hosting comment forums to

determine how to get the best out of them. Eltringham says it is important to the BBC

that journalists hear and report everything, therefore it supports the use of

technologies that enable the expression of a broad range of views (Eltringham,

2008).

Chapter 3 showed that the key to maintaining a productive online public sphere

through comment forums is proper administration (Gillmor, 2009). The BBC

moderates message boards to direct the conversation away from topics that create

anti-social responses. Eltringham says that fair comment to one person may be

offensive to someone else, therefore moderation exists to maintain quality

(Eltringham, 2008). In 2008 the BBC became aware that its moderation system was

less than ideal, and while it tried to be transparent about its reasoning for moderation,

135

it received many complaints about many aspects of the process. People were

becoming annoyed when the publication of their content was delayed because they

felt it interfered with the flow of their conversational exchanges. Also, individuals

did not like being prevented from posting comments more than twice per hour, a rule

designed to stop people from dominating the conversation.

After trying a range of different software to improve functionality and to enable

greater scope for public participation, the BBC decided to move to a blog-based

platform, which enabled it to moderate in almost real time. In contrast to the

problems associated with message board comment systems, blog comments were

moderated in about twenty minutes and approximately ninety-eight per cent of

content that followed house rules was published (Eltringham, 2010). The capacity for

blogs to promote dialogue between the newsroom and members of the audience was

very encouraging for the newsroom, with the consensus being that the use of

comment forums on news stories would lead to “improved journalism” (Horrocks,

2008b: 17).

Blogs: 2001–Ongoing

The BBC’s use of blogs began in 2001 with Nick Robinson’s Newslog, a diarised

coverage of the UK election (see Appendix D). Ten years later, its blog network had

grown to include more than 300 individual sites (Shiel, 2012). BBC blogs initially

used the same format as the blogs of the time, but it had to decide on the most

effective way to use the platform, whether as “a diary column, or breaking news, or

end-of-day analysis or running commentary - or all of them” (G. Wilson, 2011). The

‘About’ page on Robinson’s blog stated that it would be used to provide news,

opinion and links to “things that happened” (Robinson, 2001). The Newslog

comment system, unlike other blogs, did not publish user comments directly to the

blog. In fact, comments were never published on the blog at all. If readers had

something to say, they clicked an ‘Add Comment’ button that generated an email

form to ‘newsonline.features@bbc.co.uk’. This method mirrored the traditional letter

to the editor service, which largely missed the point of the platform’s interactive

capacity, but was eventually replaced with a more interactive forum.

By 2007, the BBC Blog network was well established and was blogging for the

136

purpose of engaging both “friends and critics” of the organisation in the discussion

of “strategy and direction” and harnessing the “wisdom of the crowds” as a way of

maintaining relevance in the new Internet age (Highfield, 2007). In 2008, following

the recommendations in the Graf review,95 the BBC Trust proposed the creation of an

Editors’ Blog, which aimed to develop the BBC’s relationship with the audience.

Now one of organisation’s most successful blogs, it provides for “continuous

dialogue between the BBC and its audience” (British Broadcasting Corporation,

2008b: 57), with editors using it to explain their editorial decisions and viewers using

it to provide the BBC with critical feedback.

After more than a decade of blogging, this platform still contributes expert “analysis

and explanation” across a wide range of topic areas and is looked upon as one of the

“major strengths” of the BBC News Website. The BBC continues to see the benefits

of using this platform, and in 2011 a decision was made to modernise its capabilities.

In an effort to create a more intuitive and smoother user experience for users, all

content created by journalists and editors, including their blogs, Twitter feeds, still

images and video, is now aggregated and presented on their own home pages. In the

past, blogs were produced on a system separate to the main production system,

however this platform indexes and presents all aspects of any BBC journalists’ work

in one space. Giles Wilson says it creates “a more compelling way to follow a story

or subject” (G. Wilson, 2011).

Blog Comments and Moderation

As previously discussed, the BBC regards comment forums, whether on message

boards or news blogs, as an integral part of its news coverage. Figure 4.5 shows a

snapshot of the usage rate of the comment services across BBC News, representing

the number of comments received per second in a fourteen-hour period, between

06:00 and 20:00 on February 11, 2011 (R. Summers, 2011). Summers says it is not

unusual for as many as 500 users per second to access news pages using comment

forums during peak periods (R. Summers, 2011).

137

Figure 4.5. The rate of comments received by the BBC. Graph produced by Richard Summers.

Adapted from http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2011/03/new_bbc_comments_module_-

_tech.html

In an effort to avoid the kind of problems identified by Bailey, Gillmor, Wilson and

Jarvis in Chapter 3, the BBC maintains a uniform comment policy across its entire

website. BBC policy ensures that all user generated content published on the BBC

website is moderated.96

Figure 4.6 shows the BBC spends ninety per cent of its moderation funds on

moderating message boards. Blog moderation accounts for only six per cent of its

total moderation expense (N. Reynolds, 2009).

The BBC uses three levels of moderation:

• Pre-moderation:97 Content created by the public and submitted to the

BBC website is moderated by journalists and editors who determine

whether the content is suitable for publication on its website. Pre-

moderation is generally applied to sites where published content deals

with sensitive issues such as religion, conflict and so on. Content

submitted to the BBC cannot be seen by other site users before approval.

• Post-moderation: allows users to post content directly to the site before a

BBC moderator sees it. Moderators check the site regularly to ensure the

content is suitable to remain on the site. Many sites across the BBC are

post-moderated. This method is popular with users engaging in debates

on news and current affairs sites because the immediacy of publication

allows for instant assertions and responses. These sites are closely

138

monitored, since they tend towards robust debates that sometimes

become controversial and abusive. BBC editorial policy on moderation

states that all unsuitable comments should be removed within an hour of

posting.

• Reactive moderation: is where visitors to the site alert the moderator to

an inappropriate or offensive message. The moderator does not read

every message.

Figure 4.6. BBC Moderation Expenses August 2009. Adapted from

http://www.flickr.com/photos/BBCcouk/3775708172/ (N. Reynolds, 2009).

BBC blogs are largely “reactively moderated”, which means they function with a

high degree of self-moderation. These blogs are hosted by a BBC editor who

monitors the tone of the community in relation to the issues being discussed (N.

Reynolds, 2009). In order to post comments on the website, users first have to

register. Once registered, users are also encouraged, but not compelled, to leave

contact information (K. Anderson, 2008).

When the BBC first moved from a pre-moderation to a post-moderation system it

observed increases in the quantity and liveliness of the comments submitted,

however it also raised concern that the quality of the discussion and debate

deteriorated “because a lot of public comment is abuse” (Sambrook, 2008). Given it

is the responsibility of the BBC to maintain the quality of published comments, the

post-moderation system increased the intensity of the moderators’ task to keep a

watchful eye on the forums, and to fulfil its obligation to remove defamatory, illegal

139

or offensive content as soon as possible (Sambrook, 2008). BBC moderators do not

as a rule edit comments for grammar or spelling, however posts containing strong

language are edited. Content with substantial errors and problems are rejected in

their entirety rather than edited, and contributors are then advised to revise and

change the content before resubmitting it.

The BBC editorial policy contains an “escalation strategy”, which is used in certain

instances to prevent individuals from posting content to the website. More extreme

escalation strategies are applied to particularly volatile blogs and message board

conversations, which prevent everyone from posting content to the site, with the

availability of a “read only” option. An example of this was seen in reports of the

death of Benazir Bhutto, which will be discussed in Chapter 7. Hosts and moderators

can obtain detailed guidelines from BBC New Media,98 while house rules reflecting

these guidelines are published for visitors to see on the BBC site.

External Linking

As discussed in Chapter 3, the BBC has been widely criticised for its approach to

external linking. The BBC views blogs outside of the BBC as sites of opinion, which

do not necessarily carry the impartiality and objectivity that traditional news

organisations aspire to (Boaden, 2008; Sambrook, 2008). Its policy on external

linking has seen a number of iterations. In 1998 news producers were required to

check the links on the linked page “to a depth of three further pages” (Hamman,

2010) before linking out. The logistics of this task, given that many pages contained

multiple links, dramatically increased the degree of difficulty for the production of

online news. This resulted in many BBC bloggers avoiding the inclusion of external

links in their posts, even though it is well established that the inclusion of both

internal and external links in news content provides users with a richer and more

varied experience (Gillmor, 2009: 7).

Following concerns raised in 2004 about the BBC’s linking practices, the Graf

report99 recommended that its policy should take a more “consistent and effective

approach to linking” (Graf, 2004: 10) and should aim for more transparency with its

editorial judgments on appropriate linking practices (Graf, 2004: 10). Since that time,

it has aimed to act as “‘a trusted guide’, a ‘starting point on the Internet, guiding

140

users to the wider web and linking to external websites with high public

value”’(Currah, 2009: 55). It now uses links in a number of ways, to show the source

of a story where possible, to source quotes, and to other publications when

mentioned (S Herrmann, 2010).

Linking out to external sites highlighted a cultural change for the BBC, something

that all organisations, to different degrees, have experienced. In the early stages of

the Internet, the BBC believed it had to encourage people to visit its website, then to

“lock the door to keep them inside” (Sambrook, 2008), which is why it did not

participate in the link economy. It has since realised that it is much more useful to

find where people are gathering, support that discussion and debate, and try to seed

some of it (Sambrook, 2008). In light of this, the BBC revised its expectation of

being people’s final online destination with a new approach to the practice of linking

out (Sambrook, 2008).

By 2011, a BBC Trust report officially acknowledged that many of the organisation’s

editorial controls, including linking practices, may not necessarily be the most

proactive way to engage with the world. In particular, the report stated:

“Participating in, linking to or otherwise showcasing the public discussions that

audiences have about BBC content is also important; the BBC does not have to host

the discussion itself” (British Broadcasting Corporation, 2010b: 59).

Prior to 2011, the BBC used an automated ‘news tracker’, which generated relevant

links to news from external websites such as Business Week, Financial Post, Times

Online and so on (see Figure 4.7a). The news tracker appeared in a text box to the

right of the article (S Herrmann, 2010).

In addition to the news tracker, the See Also blog, which began in October 2008,

presented a collection of content on the web, including comment, newspaper

editorials and analysis (British Broadcasting Corporation, 2008a). In 2009, the blog

became the Daily View and continued until 2011, when the BBC’s link system

changed, yet again, to include links “in boxes within stories and as stand-alone

pieces” (British Broadcasting Corporation, 2011c), as well as placing text boxes

showing “Related Internet Links” at the bottom of news stories (see Figure 4.7b) (S

141

Herrmann, 2010). Combined, these practices have resulted in double the number of

click throughs than occurred using previous methods (British Broadcasting

Corporation, 2010b: 4).

a) 2010 b) 2011

Figure 4.7. (a) The 2010 graphic produced by Steve Herrman (S Herrmann, 2010) for the BBC The

Editors blog, which shows how links to external sites were included on BBC webpages.

http://www.BBC.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2010/03/BBC_news_linking_policy.html. (b) An example of

how the BBC provides readers with external links to additional information.

BBC editorial staff selects both internal and external links that are deemed to have

editorial relevance to the topic of discussion or provide extra background

information, and are “suitable for the likely audience” (BBC, 2010d). In the spirit of

impartiality, the BBC aims to link to sites that provide “a reasonable range of views”

about controversial topics and public policy (BBC, 2010c). The BBC also links to

sites that contain user-generated content such as photo images and video and, in

keeping with its publicly funded model, it highlights the possibility that outbound

links might include websites that contain commercial elements such as advertising.

Adhering to its editorial guidelines, it advises its public to alert BBC moderators if

the nature of the linked content differs to the BBC’s explanation of what to expect

from the link (BBC, 2010d).

Live Blogs

The BBC has “fully embraced live blogs or networked journalism” (Wells, 2011) to

cover election, sporting and other ‘live’ events. Live blogging is a practice native to

the Web (Wells, 2011), which provides continuous news coverage of events and

allows the news organisation to weave multiple sources of information, user

comment and content, and correspondents’ stories into its method of telling a story

142

(Stone, 2011). Guardian blogs editor Matt Wells describes it as “the online answer to

24/7 television news” (Wells, 2011). The BBC creates live events pages for all key

developing news events, which have included election coverage, the death of Osama

Bin Laden,100 the Arab Spring, and the England riots.101

An early example of live blogging by the BBC was its coverage of the 2010 general

election. In this example, the live blog streamed a wide range of information

including a textual summary of events as they happened and links to both internal

and external sources of information that BBC editors identified as relevant to the

event. The blog also included public comment, tweets by politicians attempting to

provide personal updates, links to other news organisations such as the Sun,

Financial Times and the Daily Mail, and to its own programs such as Have Your Say

and the online Politics pages. It also included video and audio of news broadcasts

and links to political blogger, activist and bookmaker sites (see Figure 4.8). When

Sarah Brown, the outgoing Prime Minister’s wife, changed her Twitter handle from

SarahBrown10 to SarahBrownUK, for example, it was recorded on the BBC’s live

blog102 with a link to her Twitter stream. The live blog page provided easy to read

graphic updates of the election results and contained links to the main news page,

information on the candidates, parties and issues, debates and so on. While some

journalists have raised concerns that live blogs may, at times, be hard to navigate

since events such as the Arab Spring, for example, occur over an extended period of

time, the recent inclusion by the BBC of a “permanent summary of the latest

developments” (Wells, 2011) on its live page provides the audience with the most

recent verified facts of the story.

This chapter has shown that in the age of Internet technologies, journalism skills at

the BBC are constantly being updated to incorporate new original and innovative

methods to communicate with the public on new platforms. Journalists, now more

than ever, need the proficiency to acquire technical knowledge that enables them to

connect with the world in a range of different capacities. Broadly, their purpose is to

connect with sources of information, to make sense of data, and to distribute

contextualised information. Journalists are expected to be able to generate interactive

conversations with the public and be multi-skilled in content production for online

143

platforms including video, slideshows (with and without audio), still images, audio

and text.

Figure 4.8. A BBC News web page showing the organisation’s live blog coverage of the 2010 General

Election. Adapted from (British Broadcasting Corporation, 2010c)

4.3 The Tools of Journalism: Social Media, Video and

Instant Message Services and Data Analysis

“There are two kinds of newsgathering during times of crisis: journalists

source the news wires and social media” (Bakhurst, 2011).

Journalists have traditionally relied on the news wire to alert them to the news and

events of the world. The Internet hosts a number of different social media platforms

that now supplement traditional breaking news alert systems (Hughes, 2012). These

platforms are also used for creating new connections and sharing information. Voice-

over Internet Protocol services such as Skype, and video software products such as

Bambuser and Vimeo and a wide range of other video and instant messaging services

144

are increasingly being used for traditional journalism practices such as interviews

and video coverage of news events. The following identifies the key social media

platforms used by BBC News and explains how and why these are deployed as a

news service.

Social Media

In view of the rapid and widespread uptake of social media by traditional news

media, the BBC, like many other organisations, has incorporated social media into its

day-to-day operations. As stated in Chapter 3, sites such as Twitter and Facebook

have increased the flow of traffic to many news sites (Olmstead et al., 2012) and

served as sources of information for journalists involved in the newsgathering

process.

Social Media Editor Chris Hamilton says the BBC’s social media activity happens on

a twenty-four hour, seven-day cycle. While television retains the BBC’s largest

audience (Souviron, 2011), the link between social media platforms such as

Facebook, for example, and broadcast programs such as BBC World News, which

now has 1.5 million ‘friends’, is increasing (Walton, 2012). The benefit of generating

activity on a range of different platforms is that it increases the opportunity to

connect and collaborate with a diversity of individuals from different demographics

and within a variety of social media communities. In other words, there is more

opportunity to connect with more people, more of the time.

BBC News distributes content via social media technologies to a much larger extent

than other news media outlets (Walton, 2012). It uses platforms such as Twitter,

Facebook, Google+, YouTube,103 Flickr104 and, before April 2011, Tumblr.105 All

BBC journalists are trained in social media, and some are assigned to a specialist

team dedicated only to searching social media sites for new, interesting and original

content to share with BBC audiences (Walton, 2012).

145

Figure 4.9. The author’s interpretation of the BBC’s information flows between online news media

utilities, including social media and its website. (Images sourced from Google Images).

Kevin Bakhurst says the BBC uses Social Media for three main purposes:

• Newsgathering: to find eyewitnesses and a diversity of sources;

• Audience engagement: to talk to audiences; and

• Platform for content: to draw audiences to the website, and to share

content (Bakhurst, 2011).

Each purpose aims to improve the quality of its journalism. Journalist Stuart Hughes

says he also uses it to provide people with a sense of what happens “behind the

news” and what is coming up (Hughes, 2012). For Hughes, and others, social media

has become an essential tool of journalism since it is mainly where news breaks, and

that means it usually hits Twitter before the traditional news wire feeds (Hughes,

2012).

Hughes says journalists can use digital tools such as Tweet Deck and Hootsuite to set

up a continuous stream of location based social media feeds directly to their desktops

146

and mobile devices. It allows them to gather a constant plethora of personalised

content, including user-generated content, from around the world. While social

media has become another layer of information, and creates more depth of

knowledge in all aspects of the news process, as explained in Chapter 3 these

benefits do not arise without challenges.

Challenges of Social Media

Social media pose a number of challenges to traditional news media. There is greater

exposure to rumour, speculation, and false information. Not all users of social media

identify themselves when participating online, and not all of the content that appears

on the Internet is authentic, which means journalists need to intensify their

verification practices by adding new methods that are appropriate for the digital

environment (Bakhurst, 2011).

As shown by Hughes, the importance of developing a reliable stable of contacts on

Twitter is vital for its use as a tool of journalism. In terms of verifying digitally

produced user-generated content published on Twitter and other social media

platforms, journalists are advised to look at the embedded data such as location, time,

photo settings and equipment type to verify its authenticity. The BBC provides

regular workshops to teach journalists how to verify digital content.106

There are other ethical problems besides verification that BBC journalists must

consider when using content gathered from social media sites. Content is only used

with the permission of the creator, the BBC does not report a death until after family

is notified, and it follows laws and abides by injunctions regardless of the platform.

The BBC accepts that compliance with these boundaries means it may not be first

with breaking news, however it takes the view that “there is an appetite for a

journalism that is based on the values such as truth, accuracy, integrity, verification,

independence and speed” (Bakhurst, 2011) and as such, the news service grounds

itself in these qualities.

Twitter, Facebook and Google Plus

The BBC has used Twitter as a tool of journalism since 2008. It was initially used as

another source of information, a “link to more eyes and ears”, and was sometimes

147

found to be a useful filter of information (Taylor, 2008). According to Chris Walton,

Project Editor at the BBC College of Journalism (CoJo), the BBC’s use of this

network has since expanded dramatically, with key Twitter accounts @bbcbreaking

with 2.5 million followers and @bbcworld with 1.5 million (Walton, 2012). The

popularity of @bbcbreaking has grown rapidly, increasing its annual follow rate

from 0.6 million to 1.8 million in the period August 2010 to August 2011. In 2012,

its use has expanded to the extent that it is described as “an absolutely crucial tool

used to monitor breaking news in real time” (Hughes, 2012).

The use of Twitter has expanded well beyond the organisation’s departmental

accounts to include many more of its journalists. Hughes says he meticulously

constructs his Twitter stream to include only trusted, reliable and relevant sources.

He emphasises that journalists, as with any other source of information, have to

check and double check Twitter sources—“just because it is on Twitter does not

make it true” (Hughes, 2012). He follows hundreds of people, including his

colleagues, other news organisations, government and non-government

organisations, and people in socio-political hot spots such as Syria and Yemen, and

says he interchanges sources in his Twitter stream depending on the current

prevailing topic.

The first time Twitter was officially recognised as “a core mainstream platform”

(Eltringham, 2011) for BBC journalism, was during the first extradition hearing for

Julian Assange (A. Adams, 2011). The platform was also used by Philippa

Thomas107 to give live updates from inside the courtroom of a high profile case in the

UK. Thomas was able to gather and distribute information about the case by

monitoring the Twitter accounts of those who she knew were closest to the case,

including her BBC colleagues and a Guardian reporter. An important element of

Thomas’s account of her own coverage of the verdicts is that she had developed

authority on the case by attending every session of the seven-week trial. Her

comprehensive knowledge of the case combined with the authoritative list of

journalists she followed on Twitter positioned her to be able to contextualise and

publish information about the verdict as it was delivered. Thomas sent a ‘breaking

news’ tweet alerting her following of approximately 4,500 people to watch the BBC

News channel for the imminent verdict (see Figure 4.10). Here, on the news channel,

148

she filed a live report, which was broadcast to more than one million viewers.

(Thomas, 2012).

Figure 4.10. The @PhilippaNews tweet alerting followers to watch the BBC News channel for

breaking news. Adapted from BBC College of Journalism (Thomas, 2012).

This example supports Smith’s assertion that Twitter, as a tool of journalism, is less

time consuming than other tools and is useful in a number of ways. It allows “users

[journalists and the public] to track a moving story” (Z. Smith, 2008: 21), and is also

the perfect vehicle for sharing knowledge in real time. He says, people “want

information when it breaks” (Z. Smith, 2008: 22) and, “increasingly demand an

insight into what goes on behind the camera” (Z. Smith, 2008: 22), which he

willingly provides.

Using social media to break news has been a contentious point for a number of news

organisations, with many developing their own preferred policy. The BBC’s policy is

to break news simultaneously on its website and on the Twitter platform, however if

the technology, for any reason, does not allow this to happen, then journalists are

required to get “written copy into [the] newsroom system as quickly as possible” (C.

Hamilton, 2012). The main concern for the BBC is to ensure its network of

journalists are positioned to produce and update content for distribution across

multiple platforms, thereby providing millions of people with the most up to date and

reliable information, rather than a smaller concentration on a single platform. This is

indisputably a worthy consideration given the Thomas example of 4,500 Twitter

followers compared to the broadcast platform of more than one million viewers for

that story.

149

The BBC uses Facebook to connect with the public on a range of its own platforms,

including the BBC website, YouTube and Flickr. It also links to external non-BBC

news sites such as ABC News, The New York Times, and The Daily Show, via the

‘Like’ Facebook function. The Facebook ‘Wall’ is used to post content, ask

questions and to crowdsource information and content. The use of the ‘Wall’

encourages users to engage with BBC content via the comment forum following each

post. Each Facebook user is able to easily share BBC content with friends via the

‘Share’ function. User activity on the BBC Facebook page is logged on individual

users’ Facebook ‘Timeline’, which means BBC content gains further exposure to

people who may not have purposely engaged with the BBC.

Google Plus is one of the most recent additions to the social media sphere. Its use as

a tool of journalism is not yet well established, however, like many social media

platforms, it is quickly becoming populated with those interested in the production

and consumption of news. The BBC’s Multi-Media Journalism and Production

Trainer, Ramaa Sharma, says it has the capacity to help journalists “manage their

relationships [contacts] from one space very easily and efficiently” (Sharma, 2011).

She says Google Plus is a useful way to update stories, pose questions for the

audience (crowdsourcing), post single photographic images, picture galleries and

video, and to conduct debates using the Google ‘Hangout’ function, either prior or

post broadcast (Sharma, 2011) In other words, like other social media platforms,

Google Plus is largely used by the BBC to promote the organisation and its content.

World Have Your Say editor, Ben James, describes the way World Have Your Say is

using Google Hangout. The program posts topics to the Google Plus page and hosts

a thirty-minute daily hangout before the radio program starts. The hangout is used to

gather questions for the program’s guests, to invite people with interesting things to

say on the program’s chosen topic, to find people to participate in the program and

for suggestions for future topics. The hangout also accommodates the members of

the television audience who wish to continue the conversation after the broadcast

(James, 2012). Participation in the BBC’s hangouts is only available to those who

have been added by the BBC. James emphasises that the program does not allow

itself to be dominated by a few but rather organises people into “circles” to avoid

including the views of the same few people in its programs (James, 2012).

150

Skype

The use of Skype as tool of journalism is a cost effective way to connect with people

throughout the world. It has a reasonable broadcast quality that enables journalists to

conduct live interviews with subjects in remote, and perhaps non-liberal,

geographical locations, not easily reachable via traditional methods. Moreover,

Skype’s encrypted transmission inhibits interception by authoritarian governments.

Kevin Anderson uses Skype to connect with his contacts whose efforts to filter a

wide variety of news can add extra value to his reports (K. Anderson, 2008). He

says, contacts will see him online, open a conversation and post links to information

on a range of topics they think he needs to know. He first started to use Skype for

security reasons, “because it is encrypted on either side and it is difficult for

[outsiders] to listen in to” (K. Anderson, 2008), however by 2007 he was using it

because it was more commonly used than ISDN lines. He says Skype enables

journalists to “do things that we would not have been able to do before” (K.

Anderson, 2008). He describes two of its key qualities that add value to journalism: it

complements traditional newsgathering tools, and it can be used in the news

production process. For example, Anderson said the soldiers from the Green Zone in

Iraq involved in the World Service broadcast contacted him using Skype. One of the

soldiers had a Wi-Fi connection in Kirkuk, which enabled the program producers to

broadcast him live on air. Anderson says, “I would never have been able to do that

without the Internet” (K. Anderson, 2008). Furthermore, “the cost of this was a

fraction of what it would have been using traditional tools. Some of the more

expensive broadcast technologies cost tens of thousands, if not hundreds of

thousands, of pounds” (K. Anderson, 2008). The low cost of Web 2.0 technologies

“allows journalists to experiment with multimedia without necessarily breaking the

bank, which is good” (K. Anderson, 2008).

Data Mapping Tools

News organisations are increasingly using interactive maps for online news

journalism to increase the public’s understanding of the geographical location and

physical details of issues and events. Maps are interactive (for example, users can

click on tags to retrieve information about a particular location) and collaborative

(users can insert information about a specific location). They are created using a

151

wide range of data including text, video and still images and can link to one or more

databases. The BBC has used interactive maps during events such as the UK floods

in 2009; London Tube Strike in 2010; the UK Snow event in 2011; and various

election campaigns.

Online forms such as the Have Your Say map feedback form provide the organisation

with another channel of communication with the public (see Figure 4.11). They also

provide the public with opportunity to express opinions about a specific topic.

Figure 4.11. The first online form used by the BBC News, Have Your Say to crowdsource information.

Adapted from http://news.BBC.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/7708582.stm

The Implications of Internet Technologies on BBC Journalism

Sambrook says the BBC’s news values have not changed with the adoption of new

technologies: “we are pretty firm that we have a core set of editorial values that

applies across the piece. If you get a news service from the BBC, it should have the

same DNA of news values and principles whether it is online, on radio, or on

television” (Sambrook, 2008).

The BBC uses Web 2.0 technologies to help it identify what is important to the

public however, it sometimes happens that its website analytics will identify “the

most emailed topic” as something completely different to what the newsroom puts

down as its lead story (Sambrook, 2008), which shows that what the newsroom

152

identifies as something the public needs to know, it may not necessarily be

something that the public finds as the most interesting. Sambrook says the BBC news

agenda is not simply dictated by what is deemed popular by website analytics. He

says, “there would be no point in us being a publicly funded organisation”

(Sambrook, 2008) in that case. Its journalistic obligation to stimulate the public

debate on a range of social, political and other current affairs issues means it must

maintain consistent and clearly defined management of editorial decisions.

BBC journalism is framed by its obligation to provide the public with a

comprehensive and diverse news service, therefore it provides a much greater range

of information than politics alone. While news organisations are often criticised for

tabloidisation, the BBC takes two positions on quirky human-interest stories. A large

percentage of the BBC audience has some interest in celebrity and other light-hearted

stories, so the newsroom needs to provide that content. By the same token, “part of

our remit as a public service broadcaster is to make the important interesting and to

explain what is significant, therefore we are not going to make celebrity the lead

story” (Sambrook, 2008). The BBC is required to distinguish itself from other news

media, which means that while it seeks to understand and support audience interest

in these stories, it cannot be led by it (Sambrook, 2008). Eltringham describes BBC

stories as “a dialogue; a two way street. We run something and we get a sense of the

stories that matter to people—immigration, economy, or housing—we get a feel for

it” (Eltringham, 2008).

Taylor says internet technologies provide the BBC newsroom with “a true voice and

a true reflection of what is happening” (Taylor, 2008), with technologies as simple as

email enabling its newsrooms to quickly identify the mood, popularity and reach of

any story (Taylor, 2008). For the most part, the BBC sets the topics for discussion

and then the people have the conversation. The newsroom sees itself as a global

notice board, a conversation with the world. Interactive spaces are designed to ensure

everybody is included in the conversation, and anybody can participate. The BBC

seeks to ensure topics of discussion are of international interest, thereby encouraging

a macro conversation amongst many, rather than micro conversation between a

couple of individuals (Taylor, 2008). In that light, it has incorporated particular

153

courses of action into the moderation process to discourage individuals seeking to

dominate message and blog comment forums.

Editorial staffs are constantly on the lookout for interesting angles in every debate. It

aims to identify a diversity of viewpoints so it may present interviews that depart

from traditional and dominant opinion (Taylor, 2008).

Stories that exhibit a strong social resonance are usually pushed high on the agenda.

An example of this occurred following a BBC radio interview in which the

Archbishop of Canterbury made comments proposing the adoption of some portions

of Sharia Law108 in the UK. To the surprise of BBC producers, thousands of

lunchtime audience members responded to the Archbishop’s comments. The reaction

was “dramatic, unusual and unexpected” (Eltringham, 2008). By six o’clock, and

following 37,000 emails, the BBC had responded to the public interest by pushing

the story up the agenda to lead the news bulletin. Eltringham said, on this occasion,

“the media had underestimated the resonance that the Archbishop’s remarks had on

the audience” (Eltringham, 2008, 2010). While the story originated in the UK where

the dominant view opposes Sharia Law, it generated public opinion from around the

world. The international view, which in this case was mostly from the Middle East,

was largely supportive of the Archbishop’s viewpoint (Taylor, 2008).

Taylor says, when the newsroom receives a flood of emails on a particular topic, it

provides a strong sense of the range of views (Taylor, 2008). A diversity of

viewpoints on any issue makes the debate more interesting and therefore it is more

likely that the public will engage. Moreover, in terms of views that cross the political

spectrum, the Internet serves as a ubiquitous platform. And for the BBC, which has

to be global, the use of Web 2.0 technologies enables it to harness a diversity of

opinion (Taylor, 2008).

Trust and Transparency

The BBC has built a reputation of authoritativeness and trust with the public over a

period of eighty years. The relationship with the public is governed by particular

editorial standards, which are guided by values and principles described in Section

3.1. The organisation’s key editorial values include objectivity, accuracy and

154

impartiality (Sambrook, 2012: 9). These require BBC News journalists to present the

facts, ensure the facts are correct and to provide a diversity of viewpoints

(Sambrook, 2012). The use of Web 2.0 technologies has impacted on each of these

values.

The Hutton Report, released in 2004, criticised the BBC for not maintaining its

editorial standards. It also found the organisation “neither sufficiently accurate nor

sufficiently impartial” (British Broadcasting Corporation, 2004: 10), and said it had

falsely claimed that the Blair government had lied about claims that Saddam Hussein

was in possession of Weapons of Mass Destruction.

On the findings of this report, the BBC conducted its own inquiry, led by Ronald

Neil, into the organisation’s professional practice. The findings, published in the Neil

Report,109 recommended the organisation resolutely “recapture the full trust of

audience and participants” (2013a). In light of this, the organisation resolved to

address its weaknesses and to regain its public value (British Broadcasting

Corporation, 2004: 6).

The use of Internet communication technology presented the news organisation with

multiple ways to enrich its news services and to increase its scope for transparency

and accountability. The use of blogs by editors to theorise BBC journalism through

explanations about editorial policies and guidelines, ethics, corrections and service

changes provided an intrinsically interactive facility for public feedback and

complaints (British Broadcasting Corporation, 2004: 11).

The BBC’s primary transparency blog is The Editors, “a site where we, editors from

across BBC News, will share our dilemmas and issues” (British Broadcasting

Corporation, 2012). Launched in 2006 as part of the BBC News section of BBC

Online, The Editors blog is a public entry point to open conversations between BBC

editors and the public about editorial decisions. It is a space where the audience can

listen to a range of opinions about the BBC’s journalistic values, and how they are

applied and maintained. The public can comment, and receive instant responses from

editors and other members of the public (British Broadcasting Corporation, 2008b:

57).

155

The BBC uses the blog to publicly theorise its journalistic practices, ethics and

values. Like many news organisations, the BBC is often accused of favouring one

side of politics over another. Therefore, in an effort to be transparent it uses the

platform to let the public know about a range of issues and activities that happen

behind the scenes of the news production process. For example, where public figures

present the BBC with contradictory narratives, one on the record and one off the

record, it may describe the conditions imposed on presenters by public figures for the

broadcast of interviews and debates. Thompson says spin “eat[s] relentlessly away at

public trust” (Thompson, 2008), therefore in the spirit of cultivating trust, the BBC

aims to openly explain its ethical dilemmas as they arise in all areas of the BBC News

(Stone, 2011).

The BBC Internet Blog, started in October 2007, is another site created, says then

Divisional Director, BBC Future Media and Technology Division, Ashley Highfield,

“to have an open, direct, and hopefully lively conversation about everything we do,

and plan to do, on BBC.co.uk and all our on-demand platforms (such as interactive

TV and mobile)” (Highfield, 2007).

Conclusion

This chapter has shown how the use of Web 2.0 technologies by BBC News has

enhanced its capacity to connect with its audience, and to deliver more participatory

spaces for public deliberation on matters of public interest.

An overview of the BBC’s model of journalism emphasised the organisation’s

commitment to its role as a member of the Fourth Estate, which includes ensuring

equality of access to a variety of interactive channels of communication on different

topics of public interest, and ensuring the public has the skills to participate in public

debates hosted across the BBC Online website. This illustrates the BBC’s ongoing

diligence to its role in a democracy as defined by its Charter, and that it

conceptualises citizens as political entities who have a right to be provided with

accurate and balanced coverage of the political process both in the UK and

internationally, and the opportunity to participate in a variety of social and political

debates.

156

The chapter has shown that the new tools and technologies of journalism have

precipitated a modification of traditional practice within the BBC in ways that are

much more inclusive of a broader range of public opinion and needs. Importantly,

however, it also shows that while BBC News welcomes the changes advanced by

Web 2.0 technologies, it remains committed to traditional ideals and values of

journalism. BBC editors and journalists continue to express their obligation to

transparency and presenting balanced, reliable and trustworthy coverage of issues

and events, largely via The Editors blog.

The BBC combines a variety of Web 2.0 based tools and technologies with

traditional professional journalism practice for the purpose of increasing interactivity

between its journalists and citizens, to foster citizen engagement, and to provide the

public with what it needs and wants to know, in an engaging and entertaining

fashion. The ways in which it uses these evolves with each new event. The use of

Web 2.0 technologies have created more opportunities for the BBC to reflect the

public’s shared experiences, and to help make complex social, political and

economic topics equally accessible to local and international audiences, than was

possible using broadcast platforms only.

This chapter has reviewed the ways in which the BBC uses news blogs, a variety of

social media applications, and technologies 110 including crowdsourcing and

networked journalism, and its approach to user-generated content. Web 2.0

technologies are used to gather information, to build case studies, to source and

verify information including user-generated content, and to crowdsource information

about anything from the quality of petrol being sold by local service stations, to

elections, political misconduct, environmental crises and/or war. BBC reporters

consistently re-purpose the way they use Web 2.0 technologies to improve the

standard of service the BBC provides for the public.

The BBC’s effort to fulfil its obligation to stimulate the public debate is illustrated

through its use of digital comment forums attached to blogs, message boards and

programs such as Have Your Say. The chapter shows that the use of Web 2.0

technologies by current affairs programs has enabled broadcast program producers to

include members of the public in live interviews with public officials. Where

157

journalists have traditionally determined which questions would or would not be

asked of officials, the BBC now offers individual members of the public the

opportunity to find out what they want to know. Consistent with theories of

deliberation, each of these methods of participation enables people to express their

beliefs, ideas and opinions, and to contest the views of others.

The chapter also shows that BBC News encourages the public to produce audio and

visual content which may be shared with the world in its original form or

professionally contextualised/editorialised for a more comprehensive understanding

by the mass audience. Editorial control over user-generated content is maintained to

ensure the content is authentic, verified, and is of a high enough standard to be

distributed across the BBC to each of its platforms: radio, television and online.

This review suggests the incorporation of the World Wide Web into the daily

routines of the newsroom has added civic value to news products and opened a

narrow pathway to the democratisation of journalism.

71 See also, a 2006 BBC white paper: A Public Service For All: The BBC In The Digital Age, which states the six purposes of the BBC as set out by the Royal Charter (Department for Culture Media and Sport, 2006: 9). 72 The work plan for 2013–2014 is available at BBC Trust Work Plan http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/our_work/workplan.html. 73 iCan aimed to help the public to find information and to provide information that enables people to take action for themselves. http://www.bbc.co.uk/leicester/campaigns/2003/10/ican.shtml 74 Active engagement would begin online and then perhaps continue in public spaces (as is described by Castells). 75 A multinational force that aimed to disarm Iraq’s President Saddam Hussein 76 Click is a technology program that introduces people to the range of Internet communication technologies as they emerge for general use by the public. The public can gain access to the program using the BBC’s broadcast, online and social media platforms on http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/n13xtmd5/faq. 77 Clause 87 of the Agreement: http://www.BBC.co.uk/rd/about/introduction_clause87.shtml 78 Global Minds Blog: https://www.bbcglobalminds.com/cs/blogs/globalminds/default.aspx 79 The 2004 Hutton Inquiry investigated the circumstances surrounding the death of Dr David Kelly. The report criticized the BBC for not maintaining its editorial standards. http://www.fas.org/irp/world/uk/huttonreport.pdf 80 The 2004 Neil report, in response to the Hutton Inquiry, recommends guidelines to strengthen BBC journalism. (N. Levy, 2004) 81 Online training modules are also available to the UK public. 82 Journalists who are accepted into the Fellowship programs are required to take unpaid leave or a career break. Their salary is suspended for the duration of the candidature and the BBC does not pay any travel expenses. The US Fellowship “carries a generous stipend and covers all academic fees, health insurance and one international trip” (Baker, 2013). The Oxford program does not provide a stipend, however the BBC pays the tuition and accommodation costs (Baker, 2013). 83 This is consistent with the ways in which theorists such as Kovach & Rosenstiel (2001), McQuail (2005) and Zelizer (2004) describe normative journalism.

158

84 This includes news programs. 85 See Meyer & Hinchman (2002) and Nerone (1995) on the value of the Web as a site of democratic citizenship in Chapter 2. 86 BBC editor Kevin Marsh describes what an “output editor” does. http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2006/06/what_does_an_editor_do.html 87 See Appendix C for diagram of the BBC’s current floor plan. 88 See BBC foreign bureaux mapped by Stuart Pinfold: http://apps.stuart-pinfold.co.uk/bbc-correspondents-map/ 89 By 2012, the BBC’s verification process had become more complex with the availability of more Web 2.0 tools. See a descriptive report about the BBC’s verification process (D. Turner, 2012). 90 These include the BBC website and BBC hosted social media accounts. 91 See (Goretzki, 2009) for example of how the BBC explained the “MPs’ Expenses” scandal to the public, and the post’s comment forum for public response to the explanation: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2009/05/explaining_mps_expenses.html 92 Eltringham said the interactivity hub was “not the sexiest place to work” at first, but that quickly changed as journalists realised the complexities of the skill-set required of those working in this environment, and its relevance to BBC journalism. 93 Simple Message Service (SMS) 94 Anderson defines citizen journalism as “random acts of journalism”, whereby people generally only report on events they happen to have witnessed (K. Anderson, 2008). 95 (Graf, 2004) 96 . Moderation is determined according to the rules and laws described in BBC style guide: Hosting, Moderation and Escalation: http://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/page/guidance-moderation-hosting 97 The BBC’s Pre-moderation policy is available at http://www.BBC.co.uk/guidelines/editorialguidelines/onguide/interacting/reactivestandar.shtml 98 BBC New Media: http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/dq/contents/new_media.shtml 99 The report on Philip Graf’s independent review of the BBC’s online service is available from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport http://www.culture.gov.uk/ 100 Live Osama Bin Laden Dead: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12307698 101 Live England Riots http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14449675 102 Time stamped 16:40 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/election2010/liveevent/ Sarah Brown https://twitter.com/#!/SarahBrownUK 103 World Have Your Say: http://www.youtube.com/user/WHYSBBC 104 World Have Your Say Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbc_whys/ 105 BBC World News: http://bbcworldnews.tumblr.com/ 106 Several sites, including the BBC, provide tips on the verification process in a digital environment. See (McAthy, 2012) and BBC College of Journalism http://www.bbc.co.uk/journalism/ 107 Twitter handle, @PhilippaNews. http://twitter.com/PhilippaNews 108 Sharia Law is the moral code and religious law of Islam. 109 The Neil Report and Statement by the BBC Board of Governors is published at: http://www.BBC.co.uk/abouttheBBC/insidetheBBC/howwework/reports/neil_report.html 110 In this instance technology is defined as methods of organisation.

159

Chapter 5 Commercial Models of News Media

In the wake of the Leveson Inquiry,111 there is increased criticism and renewed

uncertainty about how news organisations should approach their role as news

providers. While there are calls for increased government regulations of the

newspaper industry, currently watchdog bodies, such as the Australian Press Council

and the UK Press Complaints Commission, are responsible for the adherence of

news organisations to the basic principles and guidelines that: ensure the right of the

press to inform the people on matters of public interest; remain independent of

government interferences; self regulate; provide widely diverse views and opinions;

and protect the peoples’ right to know (Australian Press Council, 2011).

The current topic of debate within the news industry and its regulatory bodies is

whether commercial news organisations such as News International and the

Guardian can and do uphold these principles in their endeavour to generate enough

revenue to sustain their economic and journalistic objectives. Commercial news

media is concerned with creating media for audiences comprised of diverse

demographics while simultaneously creating a platform for advertisers, too. As

explained in Chapters 1 and 2, the concerns about the commercial imperatives of

journalism are multidimensional; they encompass the issues of raising revenue to

fund journalism, keeping shareholders happy, and ensuring their methods do not

conflict with the founding principles of journalism as the Fourth Estate. Unlike the

BBC, newspapers do not ordinarily have an intricately defined Charter with strict

strategies in place to ensure their journalistic accountability to the public. Instead,

aside from the laws of journalism, they are left largely to their own devices to self

regulate ethically. This chapter, and the following (Chapter 6), will describe and

analyse two unique commercial business models, and will show how each uses Web

2.0 technologies in their approach to ethical and socially responsible journalism.

Drawing on interviews with key editors and journalists at the Australian, the Herald

Sun and the Wall Street Journal (WSJ), this chapter will describe and evaluate the

ways in which News Limited—primarily the Australian—uses Web 2.0 technologies

to achieve its economic, social and political goals. The discussion will briefly outline

its history and business goals. It will show how it is affected by the crisis in

160

journalism (as described in Chapters 1 and 2), and will show when, why and how it

transitioned from its traditional print platform to the digital news environment. The

discussion will then explain the organisation’s digital news strategy, explain and

analyse the way it uses Web 2.0 tools and technologies to gather, produce and

distribute news journalism, and will describe the ways in which these complement

and challenge its traditional work practices. Furthermore, it will show how their use

of Web 2.0 technologies addresses some of the problems underpinning the crisis in

journalism.

This chapter will provide a contrast to the theory and practice underpinning each of

the models of journalism included in this study.

News Limited

What do we, a bunch of digital immigrants, need to do to be relevant to

the digital natives (R. Murdoch, 2005)?

News Limited is a subsidiary of News Corporation, the world’s third largest media

conglomerate and the leading publisher of English-language newspapers (News

Corporation, 2010). News Corporation is said to yield more “in-depth public reach

than any other media organisation in the world” (Flew, 2007b; Flew & Gilmour,

2003: 88). With news holdings on three continents, it generates nineteen per cent of

its revenue from newspapers and information services and thirty-one per cent from

broadcast, with the largest percentage of revenue coming from its 20th Century Fox

film studios. 112It publishes three newspapers in the UK, two national editions in the

US and almost one hundred and fifty113 in Australia. It aims to derive revenue for the

operational costs of newspapers and information services, including production and

distribution of news products, salaries, rent and administration, from advertising,

newspaper sales and subscriptions.

Like most other commercial news organisations, News Corporation has suffered

declining revenues for its news holdings, and has become increasingly dependent

upon its other assets, in particular its film studios, to support its journalism

businesses (Doctor, 2010). Chairman and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Rupert

161

Murdoch114 is often accused of using News Corporation’s news holdings for his own

business and political interests rather than in the interests of the public (Neighbour,

2011), therefore his practice of propping up his newspaper holdings is viewed by

some as Murdoch protecting the “political bargaining tool” that enables him “to get

political and regulatory favors” (Arsenault & Castells, 2008: 493).

News Corporation’s business network provides it with access to multiple and diverse

channels of communication throughout the world. As a global media organisation, it

has the capacity to reach markets and communicate with a vast number of disparate

public spheres (Arsenault & Castells, 2008: 488). While it had much more power to

gatekeep information before the pervasive use of Web 2.0 technologies115 (R.

Murdoch, 2005), the reach and complexity of its network still enables it to synergise

a formation of discourses that frame debates in particular ways. The most significant

benefit of what Arsenault and Castells describe as a network of power is the

crossover of interests between the different spheres of communication (Arsenault &

Castells, 2008: 493). The Corporation connects media, business and political

networks, which enables it to mobilise power that impacts upon, if not determines,

policy decisions and political outcomes in its favour. The Guardian’s investigation

into phone hacking in the UK, which led to the Leveson Inquiry,116 showed that

News Corporation’s power network had also infiltrated the institutions of law and

order.

Despite the intense criticism of the power wielded by the Murdoch empire, Murdoch

takes a direct approach to the control of the public’s perception of him and his news

organisations and the public exposure his companies generate. Fox Business117 and

News Corporation118 news releases are the key sites from which he informs the

public about his business policies. Fox Business carries video interviews with the

CEO, which allows him to speak directly to his audience. These interviews are often

widely reported by large international mainstream media organisations such as the

Guardian and the BBC, affording him blanket news coverage.

In 2005, Murdoch addressed the American Society of Newspaper Editors on the role

of newspapers in the digital age. He acknowledged that there had been a reluctance

of many newspaper editors to take the “digital revolution” (R. Murdoch, 2005)

162

seriously, and revealed that even he had been “slow to react” to it because he had

quietly hoped “it would just limp along” (R. Murdoch, 2005). However, amid the

debate about the future of the newspaper industry was a prognosis by Philip Meyer

that forecasted the extinction of the traditional news industry by April 2040, which

seemingly caused Murdoch to have an abrupt awakening to the digital age (P. Meyer,

2004; R. Murdoch, 2005). Murdoch’s address to the editors signalled a more

accepting approach to the news industry’s cultural shift than he had demonstrated in

the past, especially since he indicated that his news businesses would now “grasp”

the opportunities arising through the use of Web 2.0 technologies, to improve its

journalism, expand its reach, strengthen its business and serve its readers (R.

Murdoch, 2005).

Murdoch suggested that his decision to transition his newspapers online was

motivated, in part, by what had, by then, become common knowledge, that people

were “increasingly using the Web as their medium of choice for news consumption”

(R. Murdoch, 2005), but more so by the idea that the newspaper was quickly

becoming “the least likely to be the preferred choice for local, national or

international news” (R. Murdoch, 2005).

In his quest to make his newspapers relevant in the digital world, Murdoch suggested

it was no longer enough to simply provide the traditional one-way text-only news

services. He expressed interest in the culture of participation, the essence of Web 2.0

technologies, and an understanding that people now want to be able to discuss,

question and debate information about their own communities and the world at large

with like and opposing minded people (R. Murdoch, 2005). In light of this, he

proposed changes to the traditional methods of news production. He said he wanted

his news sites to become the destination for bloggers, and he spoke about the value

that bloggers could add to his news coverage with their “fresh new perspectives” (R.

Murdoch, 2005). Murdoch felt that the use of bloggers by his newsrooms could

potentially deepen the relationship between his editorial staff and the communities

they serve, but only on the condition that the public had an understanding of the

qualities that distinguish blogging from professional journalism (R. Murdoch, 2005).

He said he wanted his online newspapers to be a place where readers could “engage

with reporters and editors in more extended discussions about the way a particular

163

story was reported or researched or presented” (R. Murdoch, 2005), and hoped the

interactivity between newsrooms and the public might address the issues of trust

often expressed in research studies.

Murdoch also inferred that his newspapers would partner with video programmers

and audio specialists to enable journalists to tell more stories with podcasting and

video. For example, he said, “if my child played a little league baseball game in the

morning, it would be great to be able to access the paper’s website in the afternoon to

get a summary of her game, maybe even accompanied by video highlights” (R.

Murdoch, 2005).

Thinking, again, about raising revenue, he also suggested, that given the loss of print

advertising revenue to the online environment, if they could successfully converge

print, video and audio technologies, then they might see more advertising revenue

allocated to online newspapers (R. Murdoch, 2005). Additionally, as Web 2.0

technologies evolve so too do the tools to generate more granular audience metrics

for business. Murdoch highlighted this capability as a way to better target potential

consumers for advertising revenue.

The following sections will analyse the ways in which News Limited has followed

the business plan proposed by Murdoch during his 2005 address. Murdoch presented

a strong argument for his organisation to modify the tools and technologies of

journalism for a better kind of journalism. Moreover, he made his desire for a more

networked approach to journalism abundantly clear when he spoke about the new

participatory culture being an asset to the production practices, business principles

and uses of journalism. He expressed expectations that a digital culture would

improve [News Limited’s119] journalism by drawing on a diversity of voices from the

blogosphere that would serve to stimulate the debate, and would enhance the

organisation’s ability to generate revenue.

The discussion will review News Limited’s approach to networked journalism,

which will draw on the frameworks of interactivity, participation and collaboration

described in Chapter 3. For example, it will review the way the Australian and the

Herald Sun approach blogging, crowdsourcing and the use of social media. It begins

164

with background information about News Limited and a description of its business

model, then discusses its transition from the print to digital environments. Finally it

will describe and analyse the way it uses Web 2.0 technologies to fulfil its role as a

member of the Fourth Estate.

News Limited is regarded as the most influential news outlet in Australia

(Neighbour, 2011). It defines its audience as a combination of consumers and

citizens, which means there is a division of labour between editors who manage

editorial decisions, strategise about how to generate revenue, and ensure business

obligations are fulfilled, and journalism staff who manage the organisation’s Fourth

Estate obligations to citizens (P. Wilson, 2008).

This highlights two key pressure points on commercially produced journalism. The

first asserts that commercial news organisations largely operate in the interest of

advertisers (Atton & Hamilton, 2008b: 6) and the second is a perception that the

relationship between government and commercial news organisations can become

too close (Hampton, 2009: 7; Neighbour, 2011). On the first, journalist Peter Alford

says News Limited journalism has never been influenced by advertising deals, “it is

not expected, and it is not necessary; the idea that journalists do this is largely a

myth” (Alford, 2008). He contends there are many things wrong with journalism but

an editorial obligation to advertisers is not one of them, “in the real world, that rarely

happens” (Alford, 2008). On the second pressure point, Clive Mathieson, the deputy

editor of Australia’s national newspaper, states emphatically that the Australian,

consistently aims to maintain a centrist position in the field of political debate

(Mathieson, 2009). In 2006, the Editor-in-Chief Chris Mitchell contested the

dominant view that the Australian’s opinion editorial was “far-right” describing it,

instead, as “centre-right” (Australian Broadcasting Corporation, 2006), and “down

the middle in its news coverage” (Simons, 2007). However, charges of far right

political bias by the Australian continue to be expressed (Neighbour, 2011).

Where there is a high concentration of media ownership––as is the case in Australia

where only two news media organisations hold 88 per cent of the “print media assets

in the country” (Dwyer, 2013)–– it is even more important for newspapers to “play

to the centre ground” (Australian Broadcasting Corporation, 2006) to ensure the

165

public has access to a diversity of opinion to assist people to make their own

decisions about the way they are governed. News Limited journalists reject

assertions of bias and contend management does not require them to align their

reports with any particular political ideology. Foreign correspondent Peter Wilson

says the reality is that “Rupert Murdoch does not care what journalists write” (P.

Wilson, 2008), however Wilson concedes that it may well be the case that some

editors and journalists naturally self-censor (P. Wilson, 2008). Wilson’s comment

aligns well with recent findings that most journalists in Australia describe their

personal political views as being “left wing” (Hanusch, 2013), yet News Limited

publications generally represent a conservative viewpoint (Bolt, 2009). Studies by

Gans and Leigh (2012), and Hanusch (2013) show that journalists in Australia tend

to lean to the left while editors tend to lean to the right (Gans & Leigh, 2012;

Hanusch, 2013), which informs the differences in editorial positions.

David Marr says that not only is the Murdoch news service “peculiarly attuned to its

proprietor’s whims” (Marr, 2011) but “he [Murdoch] has a long record of firing fine

editors who don’t toe his line, and of finding editors who will” (Marr, 2011). Marr

contends:

“[t]he crusades and bullying, the shit-lists and huckstering, the character

assassinations and backroom deals, the endless investment in

unprofitable newspapers in Australia, the UK and the US all have the

seamless purpose of making money, entrenching the Republican Party in

America and exporting its vision to the rest of the English-speaking

world” (Marr, 2011).

Marr’s opinion of Rupert Murdoch’s business management style lends some

credence to Wilson’s assertion that journalists have a natural tendency to self-censor.

Digital News Strategy

In 2006, News Corporation created a new subsidiary called News Digital Media

(NDM), which is promoted as “the link between digital environments and advertising

effectiveness” (Bass, Smith, & Samin, 2010). It oversees the online business

operations of news.com.au (which started July 12, 1998), carsguide.com.au,

166

truelocal.com.au, careerone.com.au, realestate.com.au, foxsports.com.au and

in2mobi.com.au, along with related activities involving News Limited newspapers,

and the Australian versions of sites MySpace.com and IGN.com.

The central mission of NDM is to build and foster a reputation based on trust

between all of its digital environments and consumers. It aims to build “premium

content environments” (Bass et al., 2010: 14) with the primary objective of

generating business with advertisers. According to Richard Freudenstein, CEO of

News Digital Media and the Australian, News Limited aims to create and distribute

high quality content to attract and engage mass audiences so it can then go on to

“monetise those audiences” (Freudenstein, 2011: 1; Melbourne Press Club, 2012).

With more than 1.5 billion page impressions per year for news.com.au the company

aims to generate enough paying subscribers to please its advertisers and therefore be

good for the business (Freudenstein, 2011: 1–3). While it does not cost anything to

access news.com.au and it will remain free for the foreseeable future, Editorial

Director Campbell Reid points out that this particular news site does not “publish

anywhere near all of the content from the metro sites” (Mumbrella, 2013), so in other

words, the public has to pay a fee to gain access to the content it needs to support

enlightened self-governing.

In 2008, almost three years after Rupert Murdoch announced that his news fold

would focus on its presence in the digital world (R. Murdoch, 2005), the most

important objective for News Limited was to identify and produce the kind of

content that would convince people to pay for it (Alford, 2008). News Limited’s

Chief Executive Officer Kim Williams reiterated this in 2012, insisting that News

Limited put “consumers at the absolute centre” of what it does (Melbourne Press

Club, 2012). Similarly, in 2013 Campbell Reid suggested that News Limited’s first

obligation was to ensure that its content increased interactivity with online

advertising, to increase profits for the online platform (Mumbrella, 2013).

While this digital strategy largely focuses on the business aspect of News Limited,

efforts to show that it remains true to high quality journalism are exemplified by the

promotion of its news products as “news which is accurate and impartial [and] is

written and edited by professional journalists” (Bass et al., 2010: 8), and ensuring its

167

content is of the highest quality (Melbourne Press Club, 2012). Its commitment to its

role as a member of the Fourth Estate is reiterated by Freudenstein’s contention that,

“when it comes to breaking stories, holding our governments and public institutions

to account, newspapers are by far the most important medium” (Freudenstein, 2011:

2). This assertion is supported by Clive Mathieson who says, “people come to the

Australian for opinion, and breaking, big and important, national stories”

(Mathieson, 2009). For this reason, it is committed to maintaining the high quality

content enjoyed by “discerning readers, business and political leaders, and anyone at

the top end of the market” (Mathieson, 2009).

This description illustrates the interconnectedness between business and journalism,

which generally draws considerable criticism from news media observers and

theorists based on the assumption that the public interest takes a back seat to business

interests (McQuail, 2005; Picard, 2004; Schechter, 2005; G. Turner, 2010). The

dominant argument put forward by Fourth Estate theorists advocates that news

content marketed as a commodity risks becoming superficial, derivative and

standardised (Picard, 2004: 54). Commercially run newsrooms tend to focus

attention toward the popular and “safe issues” (McQuail, 2005: 125) at the expense

of socially responsible reportage so they do not risk losing valuable clientele. Editors

and journalists at the Australian express their awareness of these practices and

emphasise that their publication makes every effort to distinguish itself from

competitors who engage in such practice, including those in their own stable––for

example, The Courier Mail, described by Simons as “lazy populism” (Simons,

2007)––who have taken that path (Alford, 2008; Mathieson, 2009).

Another common criticism of commercial news media is that it marginalises political

news coverage in favour of lighter content, because politics does not sell (Schechter,

2005: 17). In response to these kinds of statements, Murdoch assures his critics that

he is aware that the public wants “good, ethical, factual journalism” (R. Murdoch,

2010a: 3) and that he is focussed on providing it with “debate on the great issues of

the day with informed comment on both sides of every issue” (R. Murdoch, 2010a:

3). Certainly, those News Limited journalists interviewed for this research support

his assertion (Alford, 2008; Bolt, 2009; Mathieson, 2009; Megalogenis, 2009; P.

168

Wilson, 2008), however management clearly states that the overarching aim of News

Limited is concerned with producing content to sell products (Mumbrella, 2013).

5.1 News Limited Business Model

News Limited print and online publications are directly funded by classified

advertising, 120 transactional revenue, display advertising 121 and subscription

revenue.122 While the emergence of the Internet is known to have had a negative

impact on the news industry’s traditional business model, particularly display

advertising, the Internet is only part of the reason for the global decline in this

component of the business model, as “advertisers were leaving newspapers before

the Internet arrived” (Megalogenis, 2009).

As shown in Chapters 1 and 2, there is a great deal of controversy about the ethics,

effectiveness and value of the subscription model for online news publications. The

main points of contention revolve around the obligation and social responsibility of

news providers to ensure inclusivity and equality of access to all members of society.

Further, given the plethora of freely shared content across the Internet, the

construction of paywalls is sometimes deemed to be a potentially unwise business

decision. However, encouraged by the early subscriber numbers at the Wall Street

Journal and The Times (London), Murdoch went ahead and monetised premium

content in the online edition of the Australian (Mathieson, 2009), a decision he

justified on the basis that, “the business model based mainly on advertising is dead”

(R. Murdoch, 2010a: 19). The decision, widely rejected by critics as an exclusionary

and anti-democratic practice, came about because the company’s news holdings

could no longer generate enough revenue to create the financial strength required to

support its journalism. Murdoch said, “with our disciplined approach to monetizing

our brands, I believe we are better situated than ever to capitalise on the increasing

global demand for our superior content” (News Corporation, 2012).

News Limited rejects criticisms of its social commitment by pointing out that the

subscription model does not apply to interactive content, including blogs, therefore it

does not prevent citizens from engaging with political debates. Furthermore, it

contends the niche content that is available behind the paywall is expected to

169

generate support, based on the organisation’s trusted brand, its unique style of

journalism (Mathieson, 2009), and the banks of archived information and useful

resources that it provides (Alford, 2008).

Criticisms of the subscription model are impacted by three key developments. The

first is that many news organisations throughout the industry are moving to the same

model because they too are experiencing operating losses. Second, there is evidence

that the model can work, for example the New York Times now generates more

money from subscriptions than from advertising (Lee, 2012). More specifically,

digital subscriptions were expected to account for 12 percent123 of the organisation’s

total subscription sales for 2012 (Lee, 2012). Third, in response to the argument that

everyone should have access to the news regardless of his or her ability to pay,

Murdoch says the cost of producing online news is much lower than the production

and distribution costs generated by the traditional print publications, so subscribers

actually enjoy a lower price for online journalism than for print editions.

In addition to applying subscription fees to its key news holdings, News Corporation

reviewed the possibilities for the range of mobile and reader devices that could be

used to deliver news content to its customers. Further evidence of Murdoch’s desire

to “propertise” (Balkin, 2006) the knowledge and information produced by his news

organisations was revealed when he rejected partnering with the Kindle brand

because it would have required him to relinquish the rights to his content (Tabakoff,

2009). Determined to maintain full control over content and pricing, he turned to the

Apple iPad as the next viable option. Murdoch was so impressed by the ease with

which the iPad could deliver content to paying customers that he launched The Daily,

an iPad only application (R. Murdoch, 2010a). At a cost of ninety-nine cents per

week or thirty-nine dollars per year, The Daily was promoted as a “news experience

… combining world-class storytelling with the unique interactive capabilities of the

iPad” (2011).124 However, in mid-2012 the New York Times reported that The Daily

was losing $30 million a year (Chozick, 2012; Filloux, 2012).

The Daily’s problems were illustrated by reports showing the extreme differences in

the levels of engagement and interactivity between The Daily and the Huffington

Post during the Mitt Romney tax return issue, which saw The Daily generate 179

170

comments compared to the Huffington Post’s 28,464. At the time, Staci Kramer did

not see this as a failure, and pointed out that new technologies need time to evolve

before they take hold. While she expected The Daily to overcome its problems and to

grow over the next two years (Kramer, 2012) on December 3, 2012 (Sonderman,

2012), News Corporation told The Daily staff that it was forced to close because it

had not been able to build a big enough audience to sustain its business plan (Taintor,

2012). The Daily’s editor-in-chief Jesse Angelo told The Daily editorial teams that

although the publication had “over 100,000 passionate paying subscribers” it simply

was not enough to continue.

The Australian is now available to people as hard copy, and is accessible via their

desktops, iPads and smart phones, all for a fee. Facing the controversy surrounding

the Australian’s subscription fee and the global decline in print news sales, News

Limited CEO Kim Williams told the Melbourne Press Club in 2012 that all of the

Australian’s digital newspaper platforms were doing well (Melbourne Press Club,

2012). He reported that the print edition’s continued growth was evident in figures

that showed the company was selling more than 11 million newspapers every week,

and the Australian had 1.1 million unique visitors to it website and 1.14 million to its

mobile website (Melbourne Press Club, 2012). Figures released by the Audit Bureau

of Circulation in 2013 supported this, showing a growth of 39,539 digital subscribers

to the Australian over a period of three months (NewsSpace, 2013).

5.2 Print News: Transition Online

The Wall Street Journal’s managing editor Robert Thomson believes the decline of

news publications around the world is, in part, an effect of the industry’s aversion to

change (Thomson, 2007). Failure to embrace the technological changes affecting the

news industry is most prevalent in countries where there is a lack of media

competition. In cities such as London where there are at least seventeen competing

news organisations, competition drives publications to aggressively respond to

professional and business challenges (Thomson, 2007). Since there are far fewer

publications in competition with each other in Australia than there are in London, if

Thomson (2007) is correct, then that may explain why News Limited arrived online

much later than international publications such as The Times (London)125 or the

171

Guardian, for example. Overall, News Corporation’s global network of news

publications was relatively late to adopt the online environment but News Limited

was the latest of all. While Murdoch was initially unsure about how to make a profit

online, as recently as ten years ago, when dial-up was the prevalent means to access

the World Wide Web, there were few people online who had sufficient bandwidth to

download multi-media content, so from his point of view there was little urgency to

allocate a lot of resources to the online environment.

In 2005 however, in addition to his address to the American Society of Newspaper

Editors, Murdoch announced to a News Limited editors meeting that every journalist

would write for online first and print would become secondary. This was not an

indication that Murdoch had given up on the future of print newspapers. On the

contrary, his organisation operated with a belief that new media technologies

enhanced the capacity for traditional news media organisations to produce and

distribute compelling content to people on a much wider scale than was possible

before the introduction of the Internet and its associated technologies (Allan, 2006).

Rather, Murdoch’s move online was an attempt to regain some of the ground lost

during the economic downturn, which saw a dramatic drop in newspaper sales

throughout the world. Newspapers that had successfully migrated online, such as the

Guardian, showed an increased readership that extended beyond its traditional reach

and its national borders ("Who killed the newspaper?," 2006). News Corporation had

become acutely aware that the news organisations that understood how to use

modern publishing devices would lead the field (R. Murdoch, 2005; Thomson,

2007).

The decision to publish news online created a new editorial challenge that involved

decisions about the kind of content that ought be posted online and when it should be

posted (Thomson, 2007). News Limited journalists said their digital news sites aimed

to create an interactive experience that functioned to complement rather than

duplicate the print edition (Megalogenis, 2009). With the aid of communities of

comment, linkages to both internal and external sites, and easy to navigate archives,

the Australian website aimed to put complicated political events and issues into

context with the help of the public (R. Murdoch, 2005). Like other News Corporation

172

news holdings such as the Wall Street Journal and the The Times (London), the

Australian website aimed to become an “online experience” (Thomson, 2007).

One of the economic advantages to online publishing is the ability to endlessly

repurpose content in different formats on multiple platforms. As such, the Australian

sources a lot of its international content from the The Times (London) (Thomson,

2007), the Wall Street Journal, and Dow Jones (Mathieson, 2009). Furthermore, the

stable of News Corporation news outlets take the opportunity to maximise profits by

repurposing English content for publications in non-English speaking locales such as

India, Dubai, Tokyo and Poland (Thomson, 2007).

In 2007, Thomson said the Australian was naturally positioned to seize the

opportunities to increase its relevance and capitalise on the global business and

finance spheres. He expected the number of Indian readers of English language

publications such as the The Times (London) and the Australian to dramatically

increase in the near future. Given that India is one the key countries of economic and

business growth, he said the Australian’s geographical location and time zone

positions it ahead of China and the US, which means it has the advantage of being

able to aggregate and package news about commodities for India before the

beginning of business hours (Thomson, 2007). This example illustrates the

innovative ways in which news organisations can use Web 2.0 technologies to

identify and cultivate niche audiences.

News Limited’s Transition

Michael Stutchbury led News Limited’s transition from print to online news (P.

Wilson, 2008). In the beginning, journalists were reluctant to make the change,

simply because it was new and they were more concerned with the ongoing activities

and demands of the traditional newsroom. The move online represented a huge

cultural shift for many news workers, with many of the lower level reporters being

the first to enter the new environment. The high-level reporters did not consider the

online world important until the announcement that News Limited online was to

become a high priority. As the publication’s most authoritative voices began to

emerge online, the growth of the platform began to increase (P. Wilson, 2008).

173

Each of News Limited’s mastheads has a separate identity, which creates an editorial

challenge for the organisation since it shares most of its available resources across

the organisation. The Australian is separate from and competes with the other News

Limited publications, yet each of the other sites has access to most of the

Australian’s resources (P. Wilson, 2008). The CEO continues to emphasise the need

to carry on building the brand on state-by-state and national platforms. The state-

based papers are primarily concerned with their own domestic issues and events,

whereas the Australian attempts to cover national issues and events (P. Wilson,

2008).

News Limited journalists contend that Internet technology has not changed

professional news values, however the emergence of many new voices has

compelled the organisation to reassess the values and assets that sets it apart from the

rest of the field. Based on the premise that its greatest asset is its journalism, the

Australian continues to build its core competencies, which includes its credibility as

an authoritative voice in Australian politics. Unwilling to follow the path taken by

other organisations that deliberately pitch websites well below the intellectual

position of their print editions to achieve “hits in the market” (P. Wilson, 2008),

Wilson said that all News Limited websites aim to reflect the strength of its print

publications (P. Wilson, 2008). He said failure to manage the print and online

platforms with identical values risks a misrepresentation of the masthead, which

could potentially decrease the overall value of the publication.126

While the Australian certainly makes every effort to make money too, it aims to be

more considered than News Limited’s other publications (Mathieson, 2009). It

focuses on a long-term goal, which is to preserve the integrity and value of the brand

and ensure a seamless migration of the masthead online. Even though it is well

known that “politics does not get the clicks” (P. Wilson, 2008), the online edition

represents itself with an international and national political perspective. It aims to

lead the news with comment and analysis on politics, finance journalism and sport

(P. Wilson, 2008). Simons concedes that the paper has had some good moments, for

example when it was the first to express doubt about the Howard Government’s

children overboard story; but it has a healthier share of the not so good moments,

174

when it had been “profuse” in its praise for John Howard and his “culture warriors of

the Right” (Simons, 2007).

Mathieson said the Australian serves a large and loyal audience, comprised of a

diversity of interests and “people come to the Australian for opinion, for breaking,

big, national, important stories” (Mathieson, 2009), which is what distinguishes it

from other Australian publications. He said News International publications such as

the Wall Street Journal and the Times of London maintain their quality in the same

fashion (Mathieson, 2009).

Developing a New Skill Set for Converging Platforms

By 2009, almost everyone at News Limited was working online (Mathieson, 2009).

The online environment required journalists to file more regularly, quickly, and at

different points of the day. It also demanded a new skill set, which included audio,

video and still photography production (Mathieson, 2009): “All of our sub-editors

upload content; they sub-edit the newspaper and work across the online platform

too” (Mathieson, 2009). The few people that do not work on both platforms are

moderators, artwork staff, the business editor, subset business editor, and the news

editor. There was only one reporter who wrote exclusively for the online

environment, everyone else was expected to write for both editions (Mathieson,

2009).

The use of Web 2.0 technologies has had a profound effect on journalism at News

Limited. Day-to-day operations quickly became more efficient and significantly

easier (Mathieson, 2009). Web 2.0 technology has expanded traditional practice

beyond the days when newsgathering involved journalists spending a lot of time in

libraries, or constantly flipping through manila folders containing story files and

clippings, to gain background information for their stories. Today, “the vast majority

of background research can be done using the Internet” (Mathieson, 2009). In the

past, journalists had to be much more resourceful, especially with stories that were

hard to break into. Peter Alford recalls a story that required him to spend weeks

sifting through microfiche at the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) (Alford, 2008).

Clive Mathieson says journalists have always had to rely heavily on their own

memory, which “is why rounds127 people were so cherished, because they had to

175

carry a lot of information around in their heads” (Mathieson, 2009). Now it is much

more efficient to search and research online and store information digitally (Alford,

2008; Mathieson, 2009). Journalists never need to leave their desks to find people,

addresses, and formal documents, since all can be done online (Mathieson, 2009).

When journalists had to rely on paper-based archives, there was no way of

identifying and correcting any errors that may have been made by the original

reporter. Subsequently, the same errors were often repeated (P. Wilson, 2008).

Today, there are many information networks available to journalists, which enable

them to triangulate sources of information in a much more in-depth verification

process than was possible in the past. Overall, it is much easier for journalists to

gather news, research in preparation for interviews and for backgrounding stories,

locate experts and develop a comprehensive understanding of their expertise before

talking to them, to find multiple sources and deploy different methods to verify

information, and to add new perspectives and greater depth to stories (Alford, 2008;

P. Wilson, 2008). “Journalists are now much more informed than they were in the

past” (Alford, 2008).

While some raise concern that the ease of Internet assisted reporting may lead to the

erosion of journalism’s core methods (Osnos, 2009: 5), Mathieson says in addition to

using the Internet, good journalists will continue to “wear out shoe leather by going

out and getting the stories themselves” (Mathieson, 2009). Similarly, Andrew Bolt

agrees that good practice still requires practitioners to “go out and talk to people for

information”, and, where required, to physically go to the library to find documents

(Bolt, 2009). Margaret Simons says that News Limited journalists are known for

their commitment to “shoe leather” reporting (Simons refers specifically to the

Herald-Sun) (Simons, 2007).

Before the Internet, a large proportion of correspondents’ time was taken-up trying to

get to a phone to dictate stories to a copywriter, or to finding a telex machine. Now,

journalists in the field can file copy from anywhere in the world at any time, using

mobile technologies. Peter Alford, News Limited’s Tokyo correspondent said his

mobile phone had become his mobile office (Alford, 2008). Similarly, Kevin

Anderson recalled the difficulty of filing stories from the field before the availability

176

of digital technologies while in his different roles for the Guardian and the BBC. He

too appreciates the ease of transmitting multimedia content from the scene of an

event in almost any locale. The Internet and mobile technology allow journalists to

transmit stories, uninterrupted, to the public by means of ongoing story updates and

interactivity, which often now includes citizen-produced content (K. Anderson,

2008). Using digital platforms enables journalists to interactively engage with

readers, to provide more in-depth information, to be more transparent by providing

links to sources of information, and to openly engage in collaborative practice.

However the immediacy of the online environment has a number of drawbacks for

journalism. The Internet has increased competition between news organisations and

independent blog services for the public’s attention and, as a result, the Australian

has ramped up its efforts to get stories up and out immediately. This is a significant

change and challenge to the traditional operations that saw stories cleared as

editorially sound then published on the following day (Mathieson, 2009). Breaking

news is published instantly, however News Limited blogs, for the most part, are

strategically updated to coincide with peak access times (Bolt, 2009). Most

journalists file stories for multiple platforms (Bolt, 2009), which raises a number of

issues for some journalists. Mathieson says the new course of action is necessary

because News Limited now competes for attention on a “minute-by-minute basis

rather than daily basis” (Mathieson, 2009).

The problems caused by this strategy are recognised throughout the industry. It is

argued that instant publishing prevents journalists from providing the appropriate

analytical elements to their stories, which ultimately causes the online platform to

become little more than a “wire service” (P. Wilson, 2008). For high profile political

reporters, the requirement to work across multiple platforms raises the question of

whether they should immediately work toward filing online stories as they break,

which may involve creating video and audio, or whether it is best for them to get on

the phone, research, analyse and file a more in-depth analysis and a much better story

at a later time. Keeping in mind that most people go home from work at 5pm, it is

unlikely that journalists would complete their research on the same day if required to

file online first (P. Wilson, 2008).

177

The Australian has addressed this problem with the appointment of a journalist to

work exclusively online and attend press conferences with the political journalist.

While this approach requires a doubling of resources, it meets two objectives that

directly benefit the business model: it allows the news service to publish content as it

happens, while also providing in-depth analytical articles, which contribute to the

public debate (P. Wilson, 2008).

5.3 Technologies of Journalism: New Participatory and

Deliberative Spaces

News Limited journalists publish news content in three distinct formats: print

newspaper, online news columns, and news blogs. It hosts approximately thirty-five

blogs across all of its publications, which provide information and opinion on topics

including politics, finance, economics, current affairs, advice on relationships,

parenting, workplace relationships, spirituality, election coverage, technology, social

and cultural issues, movies, music and literature, fashion, environment and political

satire. News Limited’s network of blogs is one of the distinguishing characteristics

of the website and of the newspaper’s online presence (Alford, 2008).

In the early stages of blogging, there was a broad concern that the act of blogging,

largely performed by people independent of mainstream media, had the potential to

render the traditional news industry redundant, which led to their reputation as key

enemies of traditional news media (Thomson, 2007). As shown in Chapter 1, by

2008 Murdoch revealed a different view of the blogosphere than the one he

expressed during his 2005 address to the American Society of News Editors. No

longer embracing the blogosphere, he decided that it was one of a number of digital

apparatuses that interrupted the interaction between advertisers and consumers on his

news sites, which significantly reduced his ability to generate profits. In 2010

Murdoch’s stance against the practices of independent bloggers had become more

complex than the problems they caused to his companies ability to fulfil their

obligations to advertisers. It now included opposition to the baseless notion that

those covering the news independent of traditional news media may eventually have

the support of the powerful to dominate the public debate, thereby rendering the true

traditional watchdogs of society silent: “[It] would certainly serve the interests of the

178

powerful if professional journalists were muted – or replaced as navigators in our

society by bloggers and bloviators” (R. Murdoch, 2010b). While Murdoch concedes

that bloggers are entitled to hold a social role, he argues, “that role is very different

to that of the professional seeking to uncover facts, however uncomfortable” (R.

Murdoch, 2010b). This view is consistent with his long held concerns that the public

should understand the place of independent bloggers compared to professional

journalists, that bloggers are not as relevant because they are not as reliable as

mainstream services, that they do not uphold the traditional principles of journalism,

moreover “even the best intentioned amateur blogger doesn’t hold the same

standards of accuracy or accountability as a professional journalist” (Freudentstein,

2009).

James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal expressed a similar view in 2008 when he

said that independent blogs, for the most part, do not do original reporting, instead

most of what they do in terms of politics and public policy is to take the reported

information that mainstream media have produced and then comment on it (Taranto,

2008). He said journalism necessarily requires reporters to gather information, so

while there are some bloggers who do their own reporting, the public still needs the

mainstream media to continue to cover what is happening in the world128 (Taranto,

2008). Andrew Bolt goes further and argues independent bloggers are too reliant

upon mainstream news media for self-validation. He observes that they are often

critical of mainstream media’s supposed failure to “pick up” on what they are saying

about a topic. He said it is almost as though they believe their work does not count

unless mainstream media acknowledge it, and even though bloggers champion their

independence, paradoxically, “many bloggers consider the acknowledgement of their

work by mainstream news media as a kind of legitimisation of their view” (Bolt,

2009).

Denis Muller expresses a different opinion on the value of the blogosphere by saying

that the presence of bloggers provides traditional news media discourses with a new

accountability (Muller, 2007). Muller’s views are significant because he was one of

the pollsters whose data was used by the bloggers criticised by News Limited during

the coverage of the 2007 Australian Federal Election. While the Australian criticised

bloggers for their analysis and reports of the Newspolls showing that the Howard

179

government was headed for probable defeat, and that the campaign was not close or

equal, nor was it entirely one sided as it had been reported by the Australian (Muller,

2007), Muller praised the bloggers, saying the best ones drew out more in-depth

information from the data than any of the traditional news organisations (Muller,

2007). In this instance, the main problem the Australian had with the blogosphere

was that bloggers had the capacity to publish reflective comment and analysis––

which happened to be in opposition to the ideological line being promoted by some

reporters at the Australian–––derived through a range of statistical investigations of

original raw data provided directly to them by a variety of media pollsters, without

going through traditional news media channels. Moreover, the quality of information

produced by the data analysts/bloggers proved to be something very different from

the unverified and repurposed content Rupert Murdoch said bloggers were best

known for (R. Murdoch, 2005).

Australian journalist George Megalogenis said that when blogging was new, there

was uncertainty about the extent to which the blogosphere would challenge the

relevance of mainstream news media, however the prevailing view now holds that

there “is room for everybody in that space” (Megalogenis, 2009). Megalogenis

believes that the uptake of journalism practice by independent bloggers has been

helpful to journalism, and generally good for the profession, because it provides a

diversity of voices and easily challenges particular points of view, bias and accounts

of events (Megalogenis, 2009).

The growth of blogging by traditional news media has resulted in an explosion in

opinion-based news coverage, which according to James Taranto is one of the most

disturbing trends in journalism. He says it is fine for the New York Times to have an

opinion page, just as it is fine for the Wall Street Journal to have an editorial page

(Taranto, 2008), however opinion should complement rather than dominate the

organisation’s original reporting. He says the Wall Street Journal produces an

unusually large amount of reporting on its editorial page, which he says is good

practice, as “journalistic enterprises that are moving more toward more opinion are

doing themselves a disservice because they are weakening what they do best”

(Taranto, 2008).

180

Murdoch does not see anything wrong with journalists expressing their opinion, in

fact he believes they should always be forthcoming with their opinions because, he

says, “they’re all citizens, they vote” (R. Murdoch, 2010a: 42). While he encourages

this kind of reportage, especially where it supports News Corporation’s political

goals and interests, he says all of his news publications also include political opinion

that opposes the organisation’s goals and interests. Plotz contends that these are

merely “window dressing” (Plotz, 2000), however regardless of political and

business alliances, Murdoch insists that News Corporation journalists throughout the

world are as devoted to uncovering corporate misdeeds as any other news

organisations (R. Murdoch, 2010a: 44).

Andrew Bolt positions himself as politically conservative, which he contends is an

advantage in Australian journalism, “if you are on the Left, it’s like a forest and it’s

hard to stand out, however if you are one of the few conservatives, there are not that

many people crowding in on you” (Bolt, 2009). Bolt’s estimation of the political

persuasions of Australian journalists was confirmed by a 2013 study that found

“more than half (51.0%) describe themselves as holding left-of-centre political

views, compared with only 12.9% who consider themselves right-of-centre”

(Hanusch, 2013).

Bolt is renowned for being provocative, with the ABC’s Q&A program describing

him as:

“A conservative provocateur who delights in aggravating his critics and

attacking the cultural sacred cows and superstitions of the New Age,

Andrew is never far from controversy and attracts a deluge of pro and

anti correspondence in the blogosphere for his commentary” (Australian

Broadcasting Corporation, 2013).

Bolt says the main aim of his work is to engage people with political issues, therefore

he writes to get people talking and reacting to his opinion. He says he is not

interested in writing simply for the sake of creating controversy, or to provoke

people, but he does want to challenge the status quo. He will not entertain the idea of

using a “timid journalistic style of writing” (Bolt, 2009) because he says reading

181

timid prose is a bit like “reading wallpaper” (Bolt, 2009), and contends it is less

likely to generate as much interest as his forthright style does.

Bolt attributes the large volume of comments and the high number of clicks he

receives on his blog to his style and to his enthusiasm for interactivity. He says

interactivity with the audience is paramount to his work and while he says much of

his work is “endorsed by a great many people,” he gets his fair share of criticism,

too. Bolt says he never shies away from “replying to even the most reactive

responses” and believes that the “particularly vehement” commenters are those “who

tend to hog the media square” (Bolt, 2009).

Economics specialist George Megalogenis says that journalists are in a position to be

able to begin debates that perhaps neither side of politics wants to have. While they

ought to argue passionately on the issues they believe are important, the case they

make must be based on fact. He says people in the blogosphere are not conflicted

about presenting objective arguments because they come to it from a different

perspective. There are Right and Left leaning bloggers who do not shy away from

their own political ideology, but unlike Bolt, 129 Megalogenis contends that

experienced journalists ought to, and generally do, know where they can and cannot

go with political debates (Megalogenis, 2009). Mark Bahnisch, too, takes a slightly

different view to Bolt on the impact of independent bloggers suggesting that they

have a greater capacity to publish “reflective and controversial analysis, and to

quickly follow up developments”, than traditional news media journalists, which he

says is the “real service of the blogosphere”(Bahnisch, 2005).

Megalogenis said that the blog platform provides yet another advantage for

professional journalists since it enables the public to instantly bring errors of fact to

the attention of the reporter (Megalogenis, 2009), and that it is unwise for journalists

to underestimate the knowledge and energy of readership. If a journalist unwittingly

strikes a nerve, a deluge of abusive comments are most likely to be posted to the blog

comment forum, which he says, usually undermines the quality of debate.

182

The Meganomics Blog

Megalogenis said that his attitude toward interactivity constantly evolves with every

issue and event (Megalogenis, 2009). The Meganomics blog began in the lead up to

the 2007 Australian Federal election and it was created with a view of increasing

public engagement with public affairs and adding value to news journalism.

Megalogenis said the platform was an ideal space to post content that was unable to

fit into the print edition, yet important enough to the public debate to warrant further

explanation and public deliberation. The readership could use the blog to absorb and

discuss a greater volume of content than was possible with the print edition alone. He

said the blog was particularly useful when he wanted to publish large amounts of

statistical data generated during the course of his investigative work (Megalogenis,

2009). The use of the Meganomics blog to publish the raw facts behind his work was

a practical approach to reporting because not only did it provide the readership with

more in-depth information, it also served to make his journalism more transparent.

Furthermore, it gave his readers the opportunity to analyse and draw their own

conclusions about the data, which they could then share in the blog’s comment

forum. Megalogenis said that he continued to use the blogging platform after the

election because he saw the opportunity, not only as a way to increase interactivity

between him, his readers and other bloggers, but to make those collaborations more

productive. He said his readers could soundly expect to be able to continue the public

conversation on the blog (Megalogenis, 2009).

Megalogenis said there are a number of points that journalists need to consider when

running a blog, such as the originality and type of content, and the tone of voice.

Given that readers now have access to a much wider range of content, journalists

need to be aware that their view is only a small part of a much broader formation of

opinion. With this in mind, it is necessary for journalists to find interesting and

innovative ways to explain their topic areas and tell their stories to readers.

Megalogenis described how he used his blog to add a different perspective to one of

the most important debates, Australia’s policy on professional immigrants, in the

lead up to the 2007 Federal election. The debate was comprised of a number of

issues, some of which were encapsulated in the charges of terrorism brought against

an immigrant, Doctor Mohamed Haneef, which highlighted government policies on

183

terrorism and immigration. Megalogenis said, “one of the dangers of venturing

online is the risk of very quickly getting caught up in information that is already

available, and journalists are not really interested in presenting what is already out

there, most are more interested in what is new” (Megalogenis, 2009). So with the

aim of bringing something new to public knowledge, he researched the distribution

of ethnic populations within the incumbent Prime Minister’s electorate, and

published his findings on the blog.

He said, his approach to the issue generated a very animated response, which

comprised of a diversity of viewpoints, some of which he had not previously

considered. The liveliness of the readership and the capacity of the blog to enrich his

network of contacts and sources was realised by Megalogenis almost immediately

(Megalogenis, 2009). He describes the Internet as “one of the most exciting mediums

out there” and says journalists can make whatever they want out of it (Megalogenis,

2009). The main approach to online journalism for Megalogenis has been to test

what works best for him and his readers and to learn from the mistakes. He says he

writes for a loyal and unique following of readers who are interested in his

journalism for the same reasons he produces it. He said unless online journalists are

willing to make an effort to provide something extra to what the public already

knows, as he did with the immigration issue in 2007, they are likely to become “a

passive vehicle online, taking in abuse and praise from readers” who are perhaps

motivated by different reasons to the journalist (Megalogenis, 2009). Unfazed by

whether the readers agree with his point of view, he says he writes about the issues

that he finds interesting. He says that although he wants his point of view to be

challenged, he expects it ought to be in a way that is socially acceptable and

respectful of others (Megalogenis, 2009).

Megalogenis said he enjoys the interactive discussions enabled by the blogging

platform, but also expresses concern about those who attempt to dominate the

discussion with negativity. The problem with Web 2.0 platforms, he explains, is that

it is easy to bully. Like many professional journalist/bloggers (See Chapter 3),

Megalogenis has first hand experience with anti-social incidents involving some

readers who post “toxic” (Megalogenis, 2009) comments to his blog. The intensity of

the antagonism expressed in his comment forums caused him to investigate why this

184

was happening, which in turn led to his discovery that the readers posting anti-social

comments to his blog were doing the same thing to nearly every blog on the

Australian. Megalogenis responded to the problem by calling all participants to

account. He said he introduced stringent new rules about the way he wanted people

to address each other and the way they addressed topics on his blog. He devised a

strategy to moderate comments to ensure that those containing personal abuse were

excluded, and he delayed posting anything that “read like a press release by a

political party” (Megalogenis, 2009) until a low traffic period.

Megalogenis describes Web 2.0 platforms as “one level more anarchic than talkback

radio” (Megalogenis, 2009). He says while talkback producers can spot the axe-

grinders and may choose to bait the audience, he suggests that the unfettered

comments generated by this model have the potential to damage the organisation’s

brand. In light of this, the Meganomics blog is not left to chance, it runs according to

pre-defined social values and principles (Megalogenis, 2009).

Megalogenis aimed to encourage as many people who wanted to participate in the

discussions on his blog to post comments. He said he consistently tried to motivate

inactive readers to participate because he wanted to gain an understanding of their

views on a range of issues and events. Blog analytics provided him with information

about the ratio of clicks to responses on his blog, so if he were to see a ratio of one

hundred to one, for example, he would pay greater attention to ways of bringing the

inactive ninety-nine into the conversation. He says if he was unable to bring those

readers on-board, at the very least he wanted to understand what they were thinking

and what they expected to gain from his blog. That kind of understanding, he says, is

what affects the agenda of what he posts online in the future (Megalogenis, 2009).

The Bolt Blog

Andrew Bolt, journalist and host of the Bolt Blog at the Herald Sun, says his

methods of gathering and verifying information have changed in many ways since he

started using Web 2.0 technologies. A traditional print journalist, he has become a

significant member of the online environment too, with each platform adding value

to his journalism for different reasons. Bolt says each format is “a home for a

185

particular type of content” (Bolt, 2009) with the blog functioning as a scrapbook of

ideas, and print containing a finished story.

Bolt holds no doubt that the blog is a beneficial resource for his journalism and for

his readers. He said he uses it to provide readers with a draft formulation of his ideas,

to store content that interests him and that he may want to develop in the future, and

to generate critical feedback. It provides a suitable and easy way to search for

archived content and allows him to crowdsource information from his readers, a

practice that he says often leads to the inclusion of more in-depth information in his

reports. He said it allows him to tell stories with a broader range of tools, including

video and graphs, which he can use much more extensively than is possible in the

print edition. He says Web 2.0 tools provide him with more scope to tell stories in

ways that foster a deeper understanding of complex political issues. It is the perfect

solution to making use of content that is important to the public interest but is far too

long to be published in the paper (Bolt, 2009). Chapter 2 showed that the allocation

of space and time in traditional media sites (print and broadcast) has long been one

of the key limitations of their use as sites of political expression and deliberation.

Bolt’s use of the blog as a compliment and/or extension of his print journalism shows

that he has overcome these limitations.

Chapter 2 presented arguments indicating that journalism has traditionally relied on a

prescribed set of sources when gathering information (Goodman, 2010), which has

the capacity to leave journalists open to manipulation and sometimes results in the

production of news narratives based on agendas that may not necessarily be in the

public interest. Bolt and Megalogenis both believe that the online media environment

presents journalists with greater opportunity to include a much more diverse range of

voices, which theoretically, according to McQuail, provides the public with a greater

connection to each other and a better understanding of social norms (McQuail, 2005:

52).

Like Megalogenis, Bolt, too, says journalists have become much more vulnerable to

instant feedback and critical analysis of their work and viewpoints, which in his

experience has presented both positive and negative challenges to his and other

journalists’ public profiles. Bolt came to the blogosphere as an established high

186

profile journalist, however his use of Web 2.0 technologies has provided him with

even greater scope to raise his profile (A. Summers, 2011) and to generate

significantly more engagement with public issues that he believes are important to

the social, political and economic interests of Australia (Bolt, 2009).

Bolt likens the concept of ‘public interest’ to “a rolling snowball”, and said, “the

hardest thing is to get the snowball started” (Bolt, 2009). As a journalist, he sees it as

his responsibility to get it started. He said, “once public interest is raised and

journalists begin to get feedback, then it becomes mutually reinforcing” (Bolt, 2009).

This view is consistent with the theories of deliberation described in Chapter 2 where

Gutmann and Thompson, for example, say online communication encourages

citizens to confront their problems by listening to others (Gutmann & Thompson,

1996: 16), and Gimmler, who says the instant and direct communication enabled by

digital technologies adds more depth of understanding on more issues than ever

before (Gimmler, 2001).

Bolt is emphatic that the issues and concerns discussed in the Bolt Blog are grounded

in Australian politics. According to Bolt, the most distinctive characteristic of his

blog is its original analysis of significant issues and events. He says his main aim is

to provide enough background and information to show people when they are not

being told the truth. In keeping with the fundamental elements that shape an opinion

blog, Bolt says: “I comment on what happens and on what I read, and I try to

produce new information” (Bolt, 2009). He says he aims to use his blog to arm

people with information that they would not ordinarily get: “I find the things people

have not been told yet, and I tell them about it” (Bolt, 2009). He challenges popular

opinion on a range issues, for example “the stolen generation” (Bolt, 2009), which he

identifies as being dominated by prejudice. Bolt is largely concerned that most of the

popular debate presents people with recycled information, which he says is not

necessarily the truth. He says, even if people do not like the line he takes, his liberal

and creative use of unrestricted Web space means at least nobody can say about his

blog posts, “there is not enough information in them” (Bolt, 2009).

Bolt illustrated this point with a story he covered in 2006 about a military attack on a

Red Cross ambulance in Lebanon by Israeli forces. The global news coverage

187

portrayed Israeli military forces as acting in violation of international humanitarian

law. Early reports in Australia (Stack, 2006) said one of several hits happened when

a bomb was dropped through the roof of the clearly marked ambulance.130 Bolt,

unconvinced that the Israeli military had acted as reported, used his blog to reject the

claims with a range of tools, including links to external sites, to provide video, still

images and theories about what had happened. Using a series of images from a video

re-enactment of the event, he presented a comparative analysis of the damage caused

to the ambulance in the re-enactment and in the actual event. Bolt used his blog to

present his research, analysis and findings, which shaped and supported his argument

that the original story was in fact “a hoax” (Bolt, 2006) and merely “Hezbollah

propaganda” (Bolt, 2006).

Bolt says the blog provides him with much more scope to talk through these kinds of

issues, “more so than in the paper” (Bolt, 2009) and says it is a good way to present

content that is of interest to a “niche audience” (Bolt, 2009). He further illustrated the

capabilities of the blog platform, compared to print, with a description of how he

used it to show what he perceived as biased news coverage by the Australian

Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) current affairs host, Kerry O’Brien. Bolt compared

and contrasted the different approaches taken by O’Brien, when interviewing then

Australian Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, and Opposition leader, Malcolm Turnbull.

He posted transcripts of each interview, side by side, with annotations showing the

differences in style and technique. He points out that this kind of analysis is

generally unsuitable for print publication due to its length and because it would not

necessarily be of interest to a wider mass audience. Moreover, the available print

space does not allow for this kind of side-by-side presentation.131

The interactive nature of the blog platform ensures Bolt receives what he refers to as

his fair share of objections, first-hand accounts and new information and

perspectives from his readers. Bolt has grown a very large participatory audience,

which means he receives a diversity of comment from contributors, some of which is

very informative to his work (Bolt, 2009). The pay off, he says, for “putting himself

out there” (Bolt, 2009), is that he gets a lot of valuable research done for him by the

people “formerly known as the audience” (Rosen, 2006). Bolt says he would never

have the time to do most of what his readers do for him, however he reassures that he

188

still has to work hard. He contends the popularity of his blog is a direct result of the

thought and effort he puts into constructing his multimedia reports (Bolt, 2009).

Anne Summers believes that the popularity of his blog is more to do with the way he

has constructed his conservative persona. He discovered the benefits of creating

controversy, conflict and the “division of opinion” (A. Summers, 2011) rather than

the contestation of knowledge and ideas.

Bolt believes traditional news media will always occupy a dominant place in the

media sphere. He says, while there is a lot of value placed on the ability of new

media platforms to allow people to “find a conversation that suits” (Bolt, 2009), the

important function of the traditional mass media is its role as a centralised public

gathering place, where particularly significant debates are contested, legitimised or

rejected.

Bolt said his agenda is to have an effect on the public debate in ways that change

certain things about the political policies controlling Australian society (Bolt, 2009).

His primary aim is to connect with the Australian public and he has little desire to

connect with the global community. He says, “if I get read in Kazakhstan, I find that

very cute but it really doesn’t alter what I really want to do” (Bolt, 2009). For

example, in 2009 his main aim was to ensure then Prime Minister Kevin Rudd

stopped what he described as “insane emissions trading” (Bolt, 2009). He said, if the

people in Kazakhstan, for example, want to agree with him, then that is “very good,

it’s nice” (Bolt, 2009) but their view is not going to affect Rudd’s policy, but if ten

thousand people from Rudd’s electorate said, “my God you are right, I might not

vote for him next time”, then that makes a difference. Bolt said, “I want to have an

effect on people in Australia” (Bolt, 2009). Bolt’s description of his approach to

communicating with the Australian public is more conducive to persuasive speech

than to journalism. Bolt uses his blog to influence public opinion and to promote his

personal view on what is the “correct policy approach” to a range of political issues

instead of providing the public with the information needed to make their own

decisions about the ways in which they are governed.

189

International Journalism and Foreign Correspondent Columnists

Chapter 2 showed that foreign reporting is the main way people learn about what is

happening in other parts of the world. Moreover, as the BBC case study has shown,

international journalism takes individual nations to the world and brings the world to

individual nations. The history of foreign reporting shows political ideologies,

conflict, economic markets, and catastrophic events—natural and man-made

(Sambrook, 2010)––drive it. While the practice has always been regarded as

important, globalisation and the pervasive use of digital technologies means

countries, their economies, politics and people are more connected and networked

now than ever before. Therefore, the value of foreign reporting is at least as

important today, if not more important, than it was in the past. While most

organisations deploy foreign correspondents,132 Chapters 1 and 2 have shown there is

a growing trend to reduce the number of foreign bureaus for a range of different

reasons133 and News Limited is one of the many organisations that have suffered

cutbacks in this area. In 2008, Peter Alford and Peter Wilson were Tokyo and

London correspondents, respectively, for the Australian. The London bureau closed

in 2012 (Knott, 2013). Wilson is now a columnist for the The Times (London) and

Alford continues to cover Asia from Jakarta for News Limited’s print and online

editions. The US desks in New York, Los Angeles and Washington have each closed

leaving the Australian without any correspondents in the US at all.

In 2008, Alford said his online articles drew little interactivity with the public

(Alford, 2008). Unlike many professional news blogs, as a columnist he said that

with less than a half dozen unexpected contacts in any given week, he had never

experienced “a swirl of activity” (Alford, 2008) that the home blogger/journalists

experience with the public. Despite the low number of respondents, he takes heart

that for each article that generates a response, he says there is always at least one

comment that provides constructive criticism or insight that he has not identified and

exposed, which inevitably improves his journalism. While there may be a number of

explanations for the limited public response to Alford’s columns, Nina Eliasoph

contends people are less likely to respond to issues beyond their own borders

because they feel less power to make a difference (Eliasoph, 1997: 607).

Conversely, Richard Sambrook argues that the things that happen beyond people’s

190

national borders have a “greater direct impact” on people’s lives than ever before

(Sambrook, 2010: 59).134

Alford indicated that the practice of interactivity with the public could be quite

difficult for foreign correspondents because they were often the only person in the

bureau. The task of having to read and respond to individual comments is time

consuming, therefore in the interest of time management journalists have to assess

the value of the comment forum in relation to the other areas of journalism. Alford

said that where people using the forums simply agree with an article’s point of view,

without adding anything to the story, he says it is pointless for journalists to reply.

Also, to avoid “setting up cross fires” (Alford, 2008), he said he did not react to

people who expressed disagreement. Alford said that News Limited’s general

experience with online comments is that many people enter the conversation “with

strongly held views” (Alford, 2008) and their comments were mostly reiterations of

those views (Alford, 2008). Alford’s comments indicate a concern that the

deliberative element of comment forums may be undermined by the entrenched and

impenetrable beliefs of some members of the public and in that case it is not the best

use of correspondents’ time to engage with that. While Alford said he values the

deliberative opportunities afforded by the comment forum, he also recognises the

need for journalists to take a considered approach to the way they manage them,

ensuring their valuable time is not unnecessarily wasted. While he said he rarely

engaged with comments on his column, he said he always responds to readers who

email him because he sees that as a much more “direct communication” (Alford,

2008). When the public asks him for more information about specific points in any

of his stories, he said he prefers to write a follow up story rather than comment in the

column’s comment forum (Alford, 2008).

Alford says, interactive journalism is “one hundred per cent better” (Alford, 2008)

for journalism than the traditional lecture model. He emphasises the importance of

making journalists accessible to readers. He looks back to the past and wonders how

journalists ever managed to function without Internet communication technology

(Alford, 2008). In the past, direct communication with the readership would involve

a letter to the editor or an angry phone call, and often the journalists were never told

191

about these communications. Today, journalists can choose a number of ways to

have direct communication with the public, and vice versa (Alford, 2008).

Wilson said he wanted to see more people offering interesting and useful comments

to his columns, rather than adding simplistic criticisms telling him whether his

viewpoint is over- or understated. He says many of the comments he receives are

from “cranks” (P. Wilson, 2008), which is not very different to responses generated

by the traditional ‘Letters to the Editor’ (P. Wilson, 2008). Of course Wilson and

Alford are in completely different situations to Megalogenis and Bolt because they

work alone in a foreign country and they do not host their own blogs.

The Australian website now has a page called View From The Bureaus, which is the

home for all of the stories by its foreign correspondents. If readers want to gain

access to Alford’s stories then they are required to subscribe to the publication (see

Figure 5.1 showing ticket icon beside the story title). The news columns no longer

include comment forums, which is also the case at the BBC and the Guardian.

Figure 5.1. A hyperlinked text box entitled View From The Bureaus positioned on The World page of

the Australian http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world (retrieved June 20 2013)

192

Moderation

The comment forums on News Limited news blogs are pre-moderated to avoid the

publication of comment policy breaches (see Chapter 3 for methods of moderation).

Popular blogs such as the Bolt Blog generate a high response rate therefore a team of

moderators provide Bolt with support to maintain the blog’s editorial integrity (Bolt,

2009). Bolt said he has developed his own brand of moderation guidelines, which he

describes as a “common sense approach” to social interaction. He says the limitation

associated with using moderators is that where the values and ideas of individual

moderators differ from those of the host (Bolt’s), their decisions about the kind of

comment published on the blog are likely to be inconsistent with what he would

ordinarily publish (Bolt, 2009). This highlights the problem with taking a common

sense approach to the comment forum guidelines, since the notion of common sense

is subject to a variety of ideological positions.

Megalogenis moderated his own blog, which he said was a very time consuming

process. He said moderation becomes tedious when “weeding out vitriol from a

minority who are not really reflective of the general readership or what the general

population is thinking” (Megalogenis, 2009). He echoed Alford’s assertion that many

people would come to the discussion with closed viewpoints, and said

“unfortunately, this particular group tends to be very motivated and they tend to exert

a lot of energy to engage in disputes” (Megalogenis, 2009). On the positive side, he

said the comment forum was a great way to connect with and gain good insight from

a lot of readers. He said he was often able to form ideas for opinion pieces through

his interactions with the people in the comment forum (Megalogenis, 2009).

Megalogenis also gave his blog community the option to use the platform to

communicate information to him privately by heading their responses with “not for

publication” (Megalogenis, 2009). This was possible because the blog was pre-

moderated by the host, therefore there was no risk that private information would be

published in the forum. Megalogenis said readers would use this method to provide

him with leads to new information (Megalogenis, 2009).

Megalogenis said that many of his colleagues did not share his passion for the blog

platform mostly because they had been daunted by what is increasingly referred to as

“the shrill” (Megalogenis, 2009) of comment forums. However, for Megalogenis, he

193

said one of the “pay-offs” for interactive public forums is that you stay “match-fit”

(Megalogenis, 2009), meaning that journalists are less likely to become complacent

in their dealings with the public.

Linking

As shown in Chapter 2, the inclusion of hyperlinks in blog posts is useful for many

reasons. Links enable readers to delve deeper into stories (Gillmor, 2009) and

provide access to sources of information, thereby making the journalist more

transparent. Weinberger says linking creates connections between people, which

gives them more information about life beyond their immediate environment

(Weinberger, 2008: 190). While the practice of linking is shown to be beneficial to a

participatory readership, it has also proven to be a difficult task for those newsrooms

functioning in print-centric environments (C. Anderson, 2011).

Even though News Limited has emphasised its commitment to digital platforms, its

workflows are designed for print and therefore not conducive to the practice of

linking. Megalogenis says he did not link out to external sites because it took too

much time to check each link (Megalogenis, 2009). Bolt, on the other hand, said he

had a stable of sites that he regularly read and linked to.135 However, he made a clear

distinction between linking to the work of others and “simply repeating their posts

whole” (Bolt, 2009), a common criticism used against bloggers and aggregators.

Consistent with the views expressed by Murdoch about aggregating content, he says,

“you don’t pinch someone else’s content” (Bolt, 2009).

While each of these journalists emphasise the importance of connecting with the

audience, their failure to link to views beyond their own somewhat reduces their

capacity to maximise their commitment to collaboration and transparency.

Social Media

News Limited uses platforms such as Facebook and Twitter to drive loyal and new

readers to its sites (News Limited, 2012). While Murdoch said he does not see social

networks as having the capacity to change the world (R. Murdoch, 2010a: 37), most

of News Corporation’s news services have incorporated a range of social media

platforms into their daily practice. Renee Barnes reports that, as a result, many News

194

Limited journalists have done a fantastic job creating relationships with readers using

Twitter and other social media, especially sports journalists (News Limited, 2012).

Caroline Overington was one of the first News Limited journalists to use Twitter to

report real time news, and to generate public conversation about significant events,

from the scene. At a time when very few people in the organisation were using the

platform for journalism, Overington attended the bushfires in Victoria with a specific

mission to cover the story using Twitter “and got enormous feedback” (Mathieson,

2009). Since then, many journalists have incorporated the tool into their daily

practice.

Bolt says he has no use for Twitter, moreover there is nothing about it that interests

him. He said, “this medium rewards the impulse” when individuals ought to take the

time to think things through (Bolt, 2009). Describing Twitter as “ephemeral”, he

suggests his blog content, by comparison, is substantial enough to take a significant

place in the broader formation of political discourses. Using Twitter is “like vandals

who one-day spray so they can feel like they count for something, and make a

difference, and that’s why they spray trains and they don’t spray garbage tips” (Bolt,

2009). He contends that the point of journalism is to reach a lot of people and to

make things impossible to ignore (Bolt, 2009). Peter Wilson said he has used Twitter

since 2008, however he does not tweet, rather he uses it to monitor what is

happening and as a source of information (P. Wilson, 2008).

In 2008, News Limited journalists were also using Myspace and Facebook to gather

news, particularly about significant news events such as the bushfires, floods, and so

on. These social media platforms were used to locate friend networks and pictures

for use in stories, with Facebook in particular being extremely useful (Mathieson,

2009).

User Generated Content

Murdoch says his news organisations encourage interactivity with their readers. He

says a lot of readers write to them, but before any of his news organisations publish

user-generated content, they are required to know the contributors to find out

whether they can trust them (R. Murdoch, 2010a: 37).

195

The decision to use user-generated content in News Limited publications is impacted

by whether the organisation has to pay for it and whether the content is appropriate

in terms of originality, authenticity, context and quality. Bolt assesses the value of

user-generated content by following traditional journalistic verification practices.

Like every reputable news organisation, he said “journalists cannot publish content

that cannot be verified, regardless of how good the content appears to be” (Bolt,

2009). Where user-generated content is not skilfully produced and readable, then

News Limited journalists do not have time to educate the writer on journalistic

production practices, and therefore the content will not be published.

This approach to user-generated content contrasts with the BBC’s collaborative

methods that use the public to tell stories to reflect the social world, which according

to Helen Boaden, are used to enhance its journalism (Boaden, 2008). Where the BBC

newsroom incorporates user-generated content into its routine workflows, the

Australian remains averse to using it at all. Other News Limited publications, for

example news.com.au, solicit eyewitness photos of events to publish on the website.

Conclusion

This chapter has shown how some journalists at the Australian and the Herald Sun

use Web 2.0 technologies to produce and distribute news journalism. It has shown

that the reason News Limited transitioned online much later than the BBC was

because its business model was designed first to maximise profits rather than provide

a public service. Several of News Corporation’s business executives have provided

reasons why it was not in the organisation’s best interest, financially, to transition

online any earlier than it did. The study has shown that News Limited’s transition

from the print to digital environment occurred much later than its UK counterparts

for reasons that relate directly to its business model and Australia’s media ownership

rules.

The chapter has shown that News Limited has been adversely affected by the

economic aspects of the crisis in journalism (as described in Chapters 1 and 2), with

a loss of advertising revenue and the aggregation of its intellectual capital by

organisations such as Google and other news aggregators. It also has shown why

News Limited has incorporated a subscription requirement into its business model.

196

The description of News Limited’s digital news strategy provides a framework from

which to understand the ways its journalists use Web 2.0 tools and technologies.

While the move online has increased interactivity between journalists and its

audiences, which essentially enables journalists to be more inclusive of public

opinion and can therefore be seen to be using methods that serve to democratise

journalism, some journalists continue to use these platforms as persuasive rather than

exploratory and deliberative spaces. This contrasts with the ways in which the BBC

uses the same technologies to canvas a diversity of viewpoints and to better reflect

the workings of the powerful and the lives of ordinary citizens. While News Limited

publications, particularly the Australian and the Herald Sun, use Web 2.0

technologies to enhance the company’s business and journalism profiles, it has yet to

fully embrace the participatory culture of the new information economy to the same

extent as the BBC.

111 The Leveson Inquiry is an investigation into the culture, practice and ethics of the press (newspapers). 112 In June 2013 News Corporation split into two separate companies: News Corporation, which includes its newspaper holdings and book publishing assets, and 21st Century Fox, which includes its television and film businesses: http://newscorp.com/about/our-businesses/. 113 This figure includes national, regional and local editions. 114 Rupert Murdoch is also News Corporation’s major shareholder. 115 Rupert Murdoch says he grew up in a “highly centralized world where news and information were tightly controlled by a few editors, who deemed to tell us what we could and should know” (R. Murdoch, 2005) 116 For the complete history of the Leveson Inquiry, see The Leveson Inquiry: Culture, Practice and Ethics of the Press: http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/ Also at the Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/leveson-inquiry 117 Fox Business, Fox News Network: http://www.foxbusiness.com/index.html 118 News Corporation: http://www.newscorp.com/ 119 While Murdoch did not specify News Limited, it can be inferred that this company was included in his business plan. 120 This includes the sites realestate.com.au, carsguide.com.au and careerguide.com.au. 121 This includes advertising on the website and in tablet applications such as The Daily. Freudenstein (2011: 10) contends readers of the Australian are more engaged with content and place greater value on the products placed alongside that content. Advertised products are aligned with the needs of the audience. (Freudenstein, 2011) 122 Subscription fees are applicable to tablet applications and were required for the Australian website from October 2011. 123 12 percent equates to $91 million out of a total of $768.3 million (Lee, 2012). Further, the New York Times does not “separate digital ad and circulation sales figures from those in its print business” (Lee, 2012). 124 See (Benton, 2011) 125 The Times (London) is published by News International, a subsidiary of News Corporation. 126 Margaret Simons provides a description of some of the News Limited publications in (Simons, 2007). She says the Daily Telegraph is “Australia’s most tabloid of tabloids… At its best, wittily incisive. At its worst, silly and destructive” (Simons, 2007), the Herald-Sun as “sharp and sometimes creative in its coverage of local news. Populist but commits to the main stories of the day. “Stirs up

197

mild controversy” (Simons, 2007); and the Courier Mail and the Advertiser as “lazy populism” (Simons, 2007). Courier Mail editor David Fagan rejected Simons description of his publication arguing that it “broke one of the best national political stories of the year––the Santo Santoro shares scandal” (Simons, 2007). 127 Rounds reporters are also known as “beat reporters”. These reporters have specialist knowledge about particular key areas of activity in the community. These areas may include law and order, politics including parliament sittings, health and education. 128 James Taranto is American journalist who writes for the US news media. Margaret Simons contends the US blogosphere registers more political power than the Australian blogosphere. 129 One example of Bolt’s lack of restraint is illustrated in the debate over identity in Australia. See (Fanning, 2012). See also Anne Summers’ essay that describes how Bolt challenged News Limited’s commitment to freedom of speech when his inflammatory blog posts about a political matter involving the Australian Prime Minister were removed from the Web site (A. Summers, 2011). 130 Israel contends that Hezbollah used ambulances to transfer weapons (CBS Interactive Inc. /Associated Press, 2010). 131 Similarly, Meyer & Hinchman (2002) provide an example that shows the failure of traditional print and broadcast platforms to adequately represent the events on the US Presidential Campaign in 2000 due to time and space constraints. 132 The Australian has correspondents posted in five locations throughout the world: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/help/contactus 133 See Richard Sambrook’s thesis Are foreign correspondents redundant? The changing face of international news http://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/fileadmin/documents/Publications/Challenges/Are_Foreign_Correspondents_Redundant.pdf 134 Richard Sambrook has a different perspective on what is presented in this section about the way people view international news. Firstly he argues that globalisation has increased interdependence between countries on a range of economic, social and political issues, which in turn has caused foreign and domestic news agendas to merge. Then, with the increased number of people continually moving across borders, the things that happen beyond national and geographically defined boundaries have the potential to directly impact the lives of everybody. Based on this, he says: “There is a strong public interest argument in informing people about the rest of the world” (Sambrook, 2010: 59). 135 Andrew Bolt lists these sites as: Instapundit; Tim Blair; Vex News; and What’s Up With That.

198

Chapter 6 The Guardian

This chapter begins with a brief introduction to the history of the Guardian, a British

daily newspaper. It establishes the traditional aims of the publication and briefly

describes its business model. It then discusses the key problem that threatens the

publication’s future, namely the crisis in journalism as explained in Chapters 1 and 2,

and will show the approach taken by editor-in chief Alan Rusbridger to seeking

solutions to the problem. The chapter will then move on to explain when, how and

why the Guardian transitioned from its traditional print platform to the digital news

environment, and highlight some of the economic and political challenges posed to

the news provider by the resultant organisational shift. It will then describe and

analyse the way Guardian journalists incorporate the new tools and technologies of

journalism with traditional practices.

The discussion will pay particular attention to what the Guardian aims to achieve by

using interactive, participatory and deliberative channels of online communication.

Drawing from an in-depth interview with Kevin Anderson, then the Guardian’s

blogs editor, an interpretive account of Anderson’s framework for hosting an

interactive online news environment that fosters productive civic engagement is

presented.

The chapter is comprised of six aspects of collaboration and interactivity. First, it

describes the important editorial differences between traditional news articles and

blog posts. While Anderson completely embraces the Guardian’s use of blogging, he

explains why he believes “there is still a place for news as lecture” (K. Anderson,

2008). It then focuses on the challenges presented to journalists using comment

forums by looking at the ways in which journalists approach the practice of writing

blog posts. An account of the ways in which Anderson thinks journalists might

encourage the public to respond enthusiastically to the topics of debate posed by the

Guardian precedes a review of its comment and moderation practices and policies.

Next, it explains the Guardian’s approach to citizen journalism with real world

examples, including the range of tools and techniques it used to provide global

coverage of the 2008 US election. Fifth, the discussion turns to the topic of

networked journalism by examining the ways in which the Guardian used the

199

crowdsourcing technique to investigate the misuse of ministerial expenses in the UK.

It concludes by describing and analysing the ways the Guardian uses social media

platforms, investigates the ways in which user-generated content is incorporated into

the Guardian’s news product, and analyses how this impacts on the politics of

journalism.

6.1 The Guardian Business Model

The Guardian was founded in Manchester in 1821. Since the editorship of CP Scott

(1872–1929), the publication has received international recognition for its

commitment to editorial independence and the fair presentation of matters of public

interest. Such recognition reflects the Guardian’s strong commitment to the

principles of the Fourth Estate, which therefore positions it as one of the key

institutions of democracy. Scott’s ongoing obligation to the public interest was

perpetuated when his Estate bequeathed funds for a Trust to be established to

subsidise the financial security of the Guardian’s independence and its commitment

to liberal journalism (Guardian Media Group, 2010a). The editorial and business

conditions set out by the Trust makes the Guardian’s ownership and business model

somewhat unique, since the sole purpose of generating revenue is to re-invest in its

own journalism. Cash flows protect its independence and promote “freedom in the

press and liberal journalism, both in Britain and elsewhere” (Guardian Media Group,

2010a).136

Consistent with the principles of the Fourth Estate, journalism at the Guardian

aspires to “honesty, cleanness, courage, fairness, a sense of duty to the reader and the

community” (Guardian Media Group, 2010a; Scott, 1921). Alan Rusbridger

describes one of the key aims as “holding power to account and bringing information

that is suppressed into the public domain” (Rusbridger, 2011). He says this approach

to journalism requires a lot of resources, therefore he realises how fortunate the

organisation is that the Scott Trust predominantly supports the organisation’s

business model, especially given the current crisis within the industry (see Chapters

1 & 2). However, the Guardian is not without its own financial troubles. While the

Guardian Media Group has a portfolio of assets and investments including radio,

property, media and publishing and cash investments, all of which financially

200

support its journalism (Guardian News & Media, 2011b), like most news

organisations throughout the world it too has experienced financial losses in recent

years.137 If current trends continue, the financial forecast for the Guardian is that it

will be broke before 2017 (Wilby, 2012).

With its current ranking in the top five most read newspapers in the world (Wilby,

2012), the struggling news organisation has so far resisted the path taken by other

major news organisations, including News International and News Limited

publications the The Times (London) and the Australian, to ask its online readers to

pay a subscription fee for its digital edition. Rusbridger138 says that he has carefully

considered the possible social, economic and political impact of constructing a

paywall at the Guardian, and in contrast to decisions by Rupert Murdoch for

example, has concluded that paywalls may isolate the organisation from global

networks, thereby having a negative effect on the sociability of the Guardian. This

view is consistent with studies showing that many people would move their custom

to other non-subscription sites if faced with a paywall (for example, see (Rosenstiel,

2010)). Further, he says there would be little economic payoff because the Guardian

would earn only a fraction of what it currently earns from digital advertising

(Rusbridger, 2010a). Finally, the business principles associated with nurturing the

performance of a paywall may alter the purpose of its journalism. Again, this view is

supported by Rosenstiel, who points out that while paywalls have the capacity to

generate some revenue, those proprietors who prevent the majority of the population

from accessing their content may be compromising their civic responsibility as news

providers (Rosenstiel, 2009b).

Instead of constructing paywalls, the Guardian has explored and implemented other

new revenue initiatives. In 2011, it announced a major shift in focus that would see

most of the organisation’s newsroom resources redirected from print to digital

platforms. One of the deliverables of this initiative is the provision of subscription

based news services to several mobile platforms, including tablets and smart phones.

Also, with increased investments into digital initiatives (Guardian News & Media,

2011b) it has expanded its operations into the US139 and Australia.140

201

6.2 Print News: Transition Online

The aim of the Guardian’s online initiative to engage readers in dialogue with

journalists and other members of the public can be understood from a number of

perspectives. The first, as expressed by Coleman and Blumler (2009: 15) and John

Hartley (2005), is that individuals have rights as citizens to participate in the

discursive deliberations that support a democratic society. Then, with the cultural

shift away from traditional news cycles and toward the continuous online news cycle

(Rosenstiel, 2009a), and with the knowledge that news organisations now, more than

ever before, operate in a global and instantly networked environment (S. Oh, 2010),

the Guardian understands that people prefer to participate in the public debate via

many different kinds of interactive environments rather than the traditional one-to-

many platforms.

The Guardian’s migration online was in part a response to its recognition of a broad

and growing online population. It transitioned gradually over a period of four years

from 1995, beginning with its computer, science and technology sections. The

successful transition, first of the webzine Eurosoccer.com, then the recruitment

classifieds (Wilby, 2012), which became the company’s greatest source of

advertising revenue, led to the establishment in 1999 of the entire network of

Guardian Unlimited websites (Guardian News & Media, 2011a). The Guardian

introduced blogging in 2000 and, since then, has expanded the production of news

content by professional and non-professional journalists across multiple digital

platforms (Belam, 2011).

Guardian editor Emily Bell says one of the key differences between the Guardian’s

online transition, and that of other mainstream news organisations, is that the

Guardian had from the start a very particular aim that it wanted to achieve, which

was to become “of the Web” rather than simply “on the Web” (Bell, 2011). In this

respect, the Guardian operates from a digital rather than the legacy print mindset,

which has spawned the development and implementation of a variety of tools and

technologies to gather and distribute news. These include: Comment is Free 141 a

platform that encourages everyone to submit commentary and opinion articles to the

main website; a diverse range of internal blogging platforms; the inclusion of the

202

external blogging platform Tumblr; and social media, including a variety of

specialised Twitter and Flickr142 accounts, Facebook and YouTube.143

It also uses metric tools that provide it with information about the kinds of content

that interest the public, which in turn allow it to make editorial decisions tempered

with those metrics (Bell, 2011). Further, the Guardian’s digital mindset has seen it

open itself to data sharing through an initiative called Open Platform,144 which

allows external organisations to access and use Guardian archived content (Kiss,

2010). Also, the Data Store holds spreadsheets and data visualisations of information

generated through a range of newsgathering methods, all of which are accessible to

anybody.

In an effort to increase its civic value, the Guardian has adopted an approach to

journalism described as “open journalism – editorial content which is collaborative,

linked into and networked with the rest of the web” (Guardian News & Media,

2011b). The primary aim of this initiative is to bring a greater diversity of voices

with expertise in particular areas into the newsroom (Mottershead, 2012).

Rusbridger believes “readers want to have the ability to make their own judgments;

express their own priorities; create their own content; articulate their own views;

[and] learn from peers as much as from traditional sources of authority” (Rusbridger,

2010a), so the Guardian constantly tries to find new ways to collaborate with

“readers, bloggers and other generators of ideas, words, news, analysis, pictures, and

data” (Rusbridger, 2009a). Consistent with the needs of the digitally networked

democratic society, as described in this thesis, the Guardian now provides interactive

environments that allow multiple entry points for citizens of all levels of education

and social status to participate in public debates, to create content, to contribute to

the analysis of data, and to access a wide range of information, in diverse formats

from multiple platforms. Like the BBC, this approach aligns with the theories of

journalism that require institutions of journalism to be innovative, engaging and

relevant. Kovach and Rosenstiel suggest newsrooms ought to “search for uncommon

ideas from across all media” (Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2001: 156) and to use these to

experiment with new storytelling techniques. The following section shows how the

203

tools and technologies of journalism at the Guardian have evolved in the digital

environment.

6.3 Technologies of Journalism: New Participatory and

Deliberative Spaces

With a global audience of nearly 30 million people (Rusbridger, 2009b: 5), the

Guardian continuously reflects on how best to manage the diversity of participants in

the many communities it supports, with a particular focus on how to bring them into

the news process (Townend, 2011). It aims to produce a form of collaborative

journalism described by its editor as a “mutualised newspaper” (Rusbridger, 2009b:

21). Like the BBC, it functions on the premise that the readership knows more than

the organisation (Rusbridger, 2009b: 21). The Guardian, too, has recognised the

need to create a number of entry points for the public to gain access to the many

interactive, deliberative and collaborative initiatives across its website. The purpose

of creating multiple environments is to provide more people with a greater choice of

forums and opportunity to participate (Hargittai, 2009). Some of these environments

include external social media spaces, all of which are large networks that have the

capacity lead more people to the Guardian’s main website145 than may have

happened directly. The Guardian’s publics are encouraged to: participate in a wide

variety of blog and column comment forums; take part in a range of crowdsourcing

initiatives; contribute opinion columns; collaborate on data sharing projects, and/or

submit user-generated content, such as still and video images, infographics, and

audio, which contribute to and enhance the Guardian’s editorial story telling of an

event or issue.

Guardian Blogs

Anderson said the Guardian uses blogs as a way of bringing the public into the

newsroom and engaging it with the public debate. The practice of blogging

encourages greater levels of interactivity between news institutions and the public,

therefore is largely understood to be a positive step toward civic engagement,

enhancing people’s knowledge, and fostering trust, which is what the Guardian aims

to achieve (K. Anderson, 2008). The conversational format of the blog, its comment

forum, and the qualities that enable bi-directional linkage between vast numbers of

204

people in disparate locations, denotes a clear shift away from the traditional one-to-

many/lecture model of news.

While the uptake of blogs by the Guardian has been successful, Kevin Anderson said

there was still a need for the traditional news story. The purpose and construction of

the traditional news story is distinctively different to a news blog post and the public

responds differently to each. The journalist doing original reporting will gather the

facts and tie as many threads together as possible to create a finished piece of

journalism (K. Anderson, 2008). Bloggers, on the other hand, may take those same

sets of facts, but use them as a basis for a conversation. So instead of tying the

threads, they tease them out, which produces a different editorial composition (K.

Anderson, 2008). While there are similarities in each process, the editorial result is

different because the goal is different. The traditional news story aims to tell the

whole story, a narrative that is created with the available facts, but a blog post takes

the narrative and turns it over to the audience to fill in the gaps and to provide

additional information and perspectives. In that light, the piece of journalism

produced at the end of the work may just be the beginning of the story (K. Anderson,

2008). Anderson’s explanation highlights the ongoing importance of traditional

articles grounded in the facts of “what is happening”, and how these can serve as a

foundation for the more conversational blog pieces that encourage individuals to

gather around to discuss, dissect and augment particular topics of debate.

While the notion of news blogging as a deliberative space is one of the ideals of

network theory (Castells, 2001; T. Meyer & Hinchman, 2002), some remain

concerned that the negligent management of blogs by some news institutions

undermines their deliberative capacity (Jarvis, 2010). Jarvis observes a tendency for

some journalists to post articles and then rather than participating in the conversation

that occurs in the comment forum, they ignore it. This thesis has earlier identified

reasons why some journalists are reticent about responding to comment forums,

however where this occurs, the principles of deliberative theory, including

reciprocation, reasoning and mutual cooperation (Dryzek, 2009; Gutmann &

Thompson, 1996: 6), are less likely to emerge.

205

Anderson’s observation of the difficulties associated with managing comment

forums led him to conclude that the problems tended to manifest long before the

public began to interact and before the journalist, hypothetically, neglected the

audience. Working from the theory that productivity, interactivity and engagement

with online news platforms begins with journalists, specifically with the manner in

which they present their blog posts, he says journalists ought to be aware that

interactive news environments require a much more conversational and inclusive

tone than print, and without it, few readers will be motivated to respond. In the early

days of Guardian blogging, there was a tendency for some journalist bloggers to

write their posts as though they were delivering a piece to camera, which was too

formal when trying to encourage people to engage in conversation with them (K.

Anderson, 2008). While there is an expectation for traditional columns to exert

authority and professionalism, the professional tones of broadcast do not adequately

serve the purpose of a blog post.

Anderson says the public is more likely to respond to individual journalists if they

express some human rapport and take a more inclusive approach (K. Anderson,

2008). However, he also points out that regardless of how inclusive journalists may

be, sometimes some members of the public are simply not interested in actively

participating, mainly because they believe journalists ought to be the keepers and

distributors of information. He says there are times when the Guardian asks readers

for their thoughts on particular topics, and the response may be: “‘Well, that’s your

job, you are the journalist, you are supposed to tell us, why do you want us to do

your job for you?’” (K. Anderson, 2008).

This illustrates a paradox and exemplifies one of the many challenges for traditional

journalists incorporating Web 2.0 technologies into their practice. While the

professionalisation of news, in some ways, was meant to remove the humanity from

journalists’ voices (see also Section 7.3), the new environment demands something

different (K. Anderson, 2008). Sambrook reports similar observations and warns that

while “the professional methods developed a hundred years ago may seem less

relevant in this new environment” (Sambrook, 2012), one of the consequences of

relaxing or abandoning these is that it is becoming increasingly harder for the public

to know what to believe.

206

In his role at the Guardian, Anderson was, in part, responsible for providing

journalists with guidance on ways to generate a positive public response. Looking at

the problem from the bottom-up, he attributed many problems to the way journalists

framed the questions presented to the public. He advised them to tell the audience

why the topic requires further investigation; explain the relevance of the research to

the public interest; and to explain that the newsroom does not have the resources

required to do the work on its own. In this way, he said, the method becomes almost

like an interview with the audience, and therefore has a greater chance of achieving a

higher quality response than simply asking empty questions. Like all research

methods, Anderson said interactivity and collaboration with the public, on digital

platforms, is a practice that requires constant refining (K. Anderson, 2008).

Comment Forums

As shown in Chapter 3, there is a diversity of academic and industry opinion about

the value of comment forums. The general consensus is that unmediated comment

forums are not conducive to deliberative discussions. Anderson says: “Getting the

comments is easy, but generating a quality conversation is much more challenging”

and conversation is what the Guardian aims to achieve (K. Anderson, 2008).

While the main reason for using a blog platform is to generate comment (Hermida et

al., 2011), Anderson says high comment counts on journalists’ blog posts are not

necessarily an indication of popularity or approval. He says “198 out of 200

comments may be telling the journalist how stupid he/she is instead of engaging with

the topic of the post” (K. Anderson, 2008). To avoid this, journalists ought to remain

acutely mindful of their obligation to present reasoned arguments that both contain

and generate a diversity of views.

While Anderson has previously established that some journalists are much more

adept at managing interactive platforms than others, he says they also need to have a

clear sense of the kind of conversation they are trying to cultivate. He contends, like

the blogger journalists at the Australian, that it is reasonable for journalists to reject

confrontational and provocative comments if they are not consistent with the kind of

tone journalists want in their comment forums, “if the comments are negative and

207

antagonistic and have no bearing on the blog post, then they are of little or no use to

the conversation” (K. Anderson, 2008).

Anderson suggests that most journalists know the topics and language that guarantee

a large number of comments. For example, if mainstream news media refer to a

member of parliament as “a raving sociopath”, then it should not be surprised when

comment forums respond aggressively. If journalists “start with ad hominem

attacks”, Anderson rhetorically questions, “can they really set a double standard and

say, ‘well we can do this but you cannot’?” (K. Anderson, 2008). He says

professional news media ought to be aware that it is responsible for the conversations

it starts. And where an unexpected public response arises, journalists can usually get

an idea of the cause by looking at their original content. Anderson’s view contrasts

with that of Australian journalist Andrew Bolt expressed in Chapter 4, that while he

does not deliberately aim to use his blog to generate controversy, he refrains from

being “timid” and prefers to “put himself out there” to generate passionate responses

and support for his political viewpoints (Bolt, 2009).

Anderson’s framework for public engagement also takes account of those whose

responses may not necessarily target the work of the journalist, but are instead

directed to the topic or the brand. He says the public might respond to the Guardian

if they don’t agree with its editorial view (K. Anderson, 2008). Similarly, when

Anderson worked at the BBC in 2004 at the height of the war in Iraq, the public

found occasion to draw on his American nationality to attack the BBC brand.

Anderson says the management of reader comments definitely requires a particular

skill set that was not required in a print environment (K. Anderson, 2008).

Moderation

The Guardian’s comment forums are managed and operated by approximately

seventeen editors and a team of comment moderators146 (Guardian News & Media,

2008), and the forums are creating the same kinds of problems for editorial staff as

those documented by each case study included in this research, and many others

(Benkler, 2006: 10) not mentioned here. Rusbridger says the conversation at the

Guardian’s forums might not be ideal, for the moment, “but that is because the

organisation has not yet discovered the tools to create really good conversations”

208

(British Broadcasting Corporation, 2011a), which indicates that the search for ways

to improve the conversation is ongoing.

The Guardian is one of the major and most inclusive and accountable sites in the

world for political expression. Its reputation for providing an inclusive, safe,

entertaining, lively and intelligent environment for users can in part be attributed to

the guidelines it has developed for online participation across the entire site.147 Like

the BBC’s guidelines, users are encouraged to “respect other people’s views and

beliefs” and urged to refrain from using divisive and threatening language. Racism is

not tolerated, and libellous, defamatory and copyright infringing comments are

immediately removed. This framework is consistent with the tenets of deliberation,

including reasoning, reciprocation and refinement (see Chapter 2).

The Guardian has a reactive moderation policy, which means that while all

comments are immediately published, they are monitored to minimise incidents of

anti-social and inflammatory behaviour and to guard against the occurrence of libel

or other legal issues. The Guardian also responds to complaints from its users.

Anderson says the organisation is always very honest about how it manages

comments. The public is advised that the Guardian receives thousands of comments

per day and has a relatively small moderation team. It asks for the public’s help to

keep the conversation civil by considering the kind of comment they leave, and to

flag any comments they find offensive (K. Anderson, 2008). One of the key

differences between the approach taken to moderation by the commercial news

providers and that of the BBC comes down to the availability of resources to

moderate all of the conversations. Anderson says the Guardian is a much smaller

editorial organisation (K. Anderson, 2008), as is News Limited, and therefore they

have less resources than the BBC at their disposal.

Guardian users are required to register with their real name and email address before

they can submit comments148 (Willmott, 2010). It also uses a system that allows

users to click on individual comments to “report abuse”. Once flagged, comments are

reviewed using the moderation framework rather than an editorial agenda. The

Guardian points out that there are difficulties associated with this process, especially

where it may appear to be operating subjectively (Guardian News & Media, 2010).

209

Again, Anderson reiterates the need for journalists to take an active role in keeping

comment forums civil by taking the time to respond to some of the comments (K.

Anderson, 2008). However he says, “choosing which ones to respond to is

challenging” (K. Anderson, 2008). Meg Pickard, suggests that journalists ought to

reward good behaviour rather than focus solely on the bad (K. Anderson, 2008). In

doing so, the organisation highlights the kind of participation it wants, and moves the

conversation forward. Anderson says it is natural to want to respond to the

commenter who calls you names, but if journalists only respond to those who shout

at them, then they are actually reinforcing anti-social behaviour. Anderson says it is

certainly possible to redirect conversations quite easily if the host is willing to try.

Some journalists find they have too many other things to do besides tending to

comment forums, a point also made by News Limited journalist Peter Alford, and

Anderson, too, sees that as a “fair call”. However, in the Guardian’s case, its

newsroom has moved toward a much more focused blogging proposition, where

journalist/bloggers now have the time because their blogs are their primary task (K.

Anderson, 2008).

The discussion about the management of blogs and comment forums shows that a

whole new dimension has been added to the professional practice of journalism by

the use of Web 2.0 technologies. The real value of using blogs in traditional

newsrooms lies in their capacity to draw people toward participation, deliberation

and collaboration. The use of blogs by the Guardian illustrates not simply

willingness but rather determination to use a variety of methods to include the

audience in the public debate.

Citizen Journalism

Anderson contends there are very few people who maintain an ongoing role as

citizen journalists. Sites such as Global Voices Online that foster and promote

journalism by citizens are a “relatively small part of the blogging population” (K.

Anderson, 2008). He supports his assertion that the majority of bloggers, podcasters

or video bloggers only perform “random acts of journalism” (K. Anderson, 2008)

with an example of citizen journalism that emerged following the collapse of the

Interstate Bridge in Minneapolis in 2007. He recalls that a person living near to the

disaster site used his personal blog to report his eyewitness account of the event. He

210

also aggregated other contextual information from the Web to provide his readers

with a more in-depth understanding of what had happened. The eyewitness said that

he did not normally create this kind of “news report”, and that it was not something

he planned to do on a daily basis. Anderson suggests that this is a common pattern

for those referred to as citizen journalists: they will only take on the role of a

journalist for the short period of time that they were an eyewitness (K. Anderson,

2008).

It has become equally common for professional journalists to try to find those people

who happen to be living the news, or who are caught up in the story, and regularly

blog about it. Such bloggers may include soldiers in Iraq, for example, who primarily

post information updates to keep in touch with their family, and are often a source of

information that is of interest to the public (K. Anderson, 2008). Anderson sees the

random acts of journalism by citizen journalists/bloggers as a complement to

professional journalism. He views the relationship between traditional and new

media producers as a “partnership of equals” (K. Anderson, 2008) rather than a

competition. He says, “I wouldn’t be able to do all of what I do, today, if it wasn’t

for all of these eyes, ears, cameras and computers around the world” (K. Anderson,

2008).

Comment is Free

Inspired by the Huffington Post’s business model, Alan Rusbridger was fascinated by

the “huge variety of voices” being carried by the publication, yet “almost nobody”

was paid (Cartablog, 2009) for their contributions. Given success of the Huffington

Post, Rusbridger became acutely aware that it was only a matter of time before it

would emerge in London, 149 so he proactively adopted a similar approach to

diversifying the voice and content in the Guardian, by creating Comment is Free.

The Guardian’s traditional opinion section originally comprised of ten exclusive

commentators. This limitation on the publication of opinion is consistent with

Yochai Benkler’s 2006 observation that the commercial mass media based public

sphere had a history of limiting its intake of “the observations and concerns of too

many people in complex modern societies” (Benkler, 2006: 11). In 2009, Rusbridger

formed the view that the idea that only the people at the Guardian know about the

211

world was “a daft way of thinking” (British Broadcasting Corporation, 2011a) and

from that point on it began recruiting more than one thousand citizen commentators,

comprising academics, lawyers, members of NGO’s, politicians, and anyone else

they thought may have something interesting to contribute to the public conversation.

The objective of Comment is Free was to carry “a plurality of voices” (Guardian

News & Media, 2008) rather than the select few professionals that traditional news

providers were accustomed to publishing (Rusbridger, 2009b). The subsequent

success of this initiative has convinced news editors that the conventional way of

writing comment is no longer “the right way” (Cartablog, 2009). The Guardian now

receives hundreds of articles each day from the global public, from which

approximately fifty are selected for publication in Comment is Free. In addition to

articles, the Guardian also publishes “105,000 comments a month from 25,000

commenters” (Cartablog, 2009; Rusbridger, 2009b: 5) all of which suggests that

Rusbridger clearly aims to create a social platform for civic discourse, perhaps one

resembling that described by Benkler, where individuals, anywhere can “become

more engaged participants in the debates about their [own] observations” (Benkler,

2006: 11) and the observations of others.

Rusbridger describes the pro-am pieces published at Comment is Free each month as

a “treasure trove” (Cartablog, 2009; Rusbridger, 2009b) pointing out that the old

model of comment could never capture the “hugely diverse streams of comment”

(Cartablog, 2009) that the new model does today. He says “there is nothing that you

can ask Guardian readers that they don’t have answers to” (Rusbridger, 2009b).

Using the Traditional and Digital Tools and Technologies of Journalism to

Engage a Global Public with the Presidential Election US08

In September 2008, three months before the US Presidential election, the Guardian

sent a sixteen member editorial crew to travel by bus through the key election

battleground states in Middle America. The purpose of this initiative was to identify

and investigate the main political issues that would attract the votes of US citizens in

the election. The news team was comprised of filmmakers, blogger journalists,

investigative journalists, editors, and a comedian/news broadcaster (Marc Maron)

who did the daily Air America Media webcast, which was also broadcast to sixty

affiliate radio stations across America150 (K. Anderson, 2009).

212

The Guardian used a variety of Internet tools to gather, produce and distribute

information about what was happening in the key areas of the campaign. It created

specialist blogs, US08 On The Road To The Whitehouse and Deadline USA Blog, to

report the daily events and issues, present video reports and interviews with officials

and citizens, and to display interactive maps, and calendars. It also published links to

other sites of information identified by the Guardian as useful to further explain the

complexities of the key political issues. The organisation also used the social media

platform Twitter to provide live updates from journalists in the field, and provided

links to its bookmarking account, Delicious, and RSS feeds. Election coverage also

occurred in specialist World News and Business columns in the Guardian’s main

news pages.

The On The Road To The Whitehouse and Deadline USA blog posts provided a vast

array of information in multi-media formats, and contained a variety of spaces where

ordinary citizens, from a wide cross section of societies, could express a diversity of

viewpoints, exchange ideas and engage in debates about a range of election issues

with journalists and other citizens. The array of Web 2.0 tools used by the Guardian

provided the public with finer detail about the peculiarities of political issues than

was possible using the Guardian’s traditional print platform only. Web 2.0

technologies provided editorial teams with greater access to the knowledge,

experience and expertise it needed for the construction of a space where individuals,

together, could freely and transparently evaluate the current state of affairs.

Kevin Anderson’s key role during the US08 tour was to examine the content

produced by the blogosphere to inform and stimulate public interest in the election.

In view of this, he spoke with a large number of political bloggers throughout the

journey (K. Anderson, 2009). Describing this experience as “a two-month

conversation with the audience” (K. Anderson, 2009) he said the use of Web 2.0

(including social media such as Facebook, Twitter and the photo sharing platform

Flickr (K. Anderson, 2009)) and mobile technologies enabled the team to live blog,

photo journal, tweet and re-tweet the debates as they unfolded. Digital technology

made it possible for them to talk with global and local publics and to gather and

aggregate information for distribution across multiple platforms for an international

audience.

213

Anderson attributes a great deal of the success on his US tour to his use of Twitter.

He said he would not have been able to cover as much ground in the US as he did

without it. The Twitter platform provided a permanently open channel of dialogue

between him and the general public, enabling him to receive and distribute real time

news (K. Anderson, 2009). He describes modern journalism as “highly distributed

networked journalism” (K. Anderson, 2009) and, while he distributed his content to

various static platforms on the Guardian website, he also posted content to a live

blog, which was continually generating content from multiple sources, public

comment and debate (K. Anderson, 2009). Journalist Dan Roberts says, “some of our

best-read stories are the live blogs that report events as they unfold, often with brutal

honesty about what we don't know or hope to find out” (D. Roberts, 2011).

Crowdsourcing: An Investigative Technology

This section describes the Guardian’s first major investigation using crowdsourcing.

It then describes the ways in which it uses the tools and technologies of social media

to encourage citizen engagement with public affairs.

Investigative journalism is expensive, however many news organisations, including

the Guardian, are experimenting with ways to use the wisdom of the crowd to

investigate issues and “build knowledgeable communities” around their subject

matter (Rusbridger, 2009b: 4–6). The newsroom asks readers to collaborate with it

on projects that require more resources than the organisation has. Readers provide

feedback and contribute ideas and advice on many topic areas. Reporters draw on the

knowledge and expertise of the audience where it may add to or inspire investigative

work on a broad range of issues. Rusbridger says many journalism investigations that

have utilised crowdsourcing methods would have been impossible without the

participatory nature of today’s news oriented community (Rusbridger, 2009a). “[W]e

couldn’t have produced what we did [on the MP expenses issue] without the

participation and involvement of others” (Rusbridger, 2009b: 6). The Internet has

provided the Guardian with the tools and human resources it needs to provide a

“more diverse form of journalism” (Rusbridger, 2009a).

The Guardian has generated a number of successful crowdsourcing projects. In

2009, it undertook crowdsourcing initiatives consistent with Brabham’s Distributed

214

Human Intelligence Tasking Approach (Brabham, 2008), which involved asking

readers to participate in its investigations into the misuse of Ministerial Expenses by

some Members of Parliament (MP). This request required participants to process

large batches of data to discover evidence of wrongdoings and/or compelling

snippets of information (Brabham, 2008). The Guardian provided the public with

access to 458,832 pages of documents, released by the UK Parliament, showing the

details of its MPs’ expenses, and provided instructions on how to find the

documents, assess their content, and to note those of interest and determine what

needs to be further investigated (see Figures 6.1 and 6.2). Participants were advised

to find and examine food bills, to register repeated claims for less than £250, and

rejected claims (2013). The Guardian provided its readers, including crowdsourcing

participants, regular updates on what it had learnt from the crowd.

Figure 6.1. The launch page for the Investigate Your MP’s Expenses initiative from the Guardian

website. Adapted from Guardian News & Media (2013).

215

Figure 6.2. An example of an expense document provided by the Guardian for investigation by the

public. Adapted from Guardian News & Media (2013).

Key: The page shows: 1. The name of the MP and the period of the Provision; 2. The expense statement; 3. The number of pages contained in the document; 4. A webform for participants to complete; and 5. A space for participants to submit observations. This section asks questions to prompt users

observations.

The Guardian also asked participants to post the visualisations/infographics of their

own analyses of the investigation to the Guardian Flickr151 group site or to the

216

Guardian Datastore via email. The Datastore has a webpage 152 to display

visualisations and its Twitter153 account was used to alert users to the publication of

new visualisations. Figure 6.3 is an example of a visualisation created by a Guardian

participant showing the total expense claims for 2008/2009, and second home

allowance claims for 2008/2009, for all MP’s.

Figure 6.3. An example of a crowdsourced visualisation. Adapted from Guardian Datastore Flickr

http://www.flickr.com/search/groups/?w=1115946%40N24&m=pool&q=MP+Expenses

Note: x axis shows the amount claimed by the MP. y axis shows the number of MP’s claiming that amount.

The MP expenses issue was seen as a successful crowdsourcing effort, especially

since professional newsrooms would never have had the resources to work through

the volumes of information themselves. This initiative exemplifies the new reliance

upon what Brabham (2008) describes as “distributed problem solving” and, indeed, a

new “production model” (Brabham, 2008: 75) of journalism.

However, in the main, it has also been realised that readers often lose interest in

participating in the investigative process following the initial flurry of activity, and

as such perhaps only half of the data is processed 154 (Marsh, 2011). While

crowdsourcing initiatives have the potential to generate new and interesting

217

information, Guardian reporter, Laura Oliver, says even though the people involved

in the open data movement are doing jobs that journalists are employed to do, it is

still largely up to journalists to do the data analysis (Oliver, 2011). While

professional news organisations such as the Guardian are yet to determine how to

maintain reader interest in this kind of work, Oliver’s view suggests that complex

digital data analysis is increasingly becoming an important mainstream skill for

journalists. The reasons why it is so valuable is its capacity to make the consumption

of news easier, faster and more interesting, and it adds credibility to stories too.

Visualisations such as those shown in Figure 6.3, for example, enable the audience to

more easily see the facts and draw their own conclusions. Data journalist, Simon

Rogers, points out that when the Guardian launched its Datablog in 2009, people

were still wondering whether stories generated from data were really journalism

(Rogers, 2011).

For the Guardian, Rusbridger says data has been a core component of its coverage

for “the full duration of its 190–year history” (Rusbridger, 2013). The differences

now, not only for the Guardian, but everybody, is open access to data that was once

locked away from public view, and the availability of computers and digital tools

such as spreadsheets and graphics software to create both static and interactive

visualisations. The Guardian Datastore aims to “act as a bridge between the data…

and the people out there in the real world who want to understand what the story is

really about” (Rogers, 2011), which is exactly how it approached the WikiLeaks data,

for example.

WikiLeaks became widely known to the world and a significant part of the

mainstream news media in 2010 when it shared a large cache of classified data,155

described by Rusbridger as “the biggest leak in the history of the world” (Leigh &

Harding, 2011: 2), with three of the most valued international news organisations,

the Guardian, the New York Times and Der Spiegel. This collaboration led to the

worldwide publication of a series of stories about professional and personal activities

of the world’s governments and diplomatic leaders.

While WikiLeaks came to possess banks of raw data that potentially held relevance to

the world, it lacked the necessary resources needed to give it the treatment it required

218

for consumption by a mass audience. The Guardian, New York Times and Der

Spiegel evaluated, verified, analysed, contextualised and distributed the information

found in the diplomatic cables provided by WikiLeaks (Beckett & Ball, 2012: 116).

Assange’s personal role was seen by the media organisations as a source156 (Hendler,

2010) (B. Keller, 2011: 2). The New York Times explains:

“WikiLeaks was not involved in the news organisations’ research,

reporting, analysis and writing. The Times spent about a month mining

the data for disclosures and patterns, verifying and cross-checking with

other information sources, and preparing the articles that are published

today” ("Piecing together the reports, and deciding what to publish,"

2010).

Journalists interviewed Assange, as they would any other source, “to be able to write

a profile of him, explain various things about the material, [and] challenge him on

various points” (Hendler, 2010).

After the three news organisations storified and distributed the content, Assange then

published the raw data on the WikiLeaks website for the remainder of the world

media to access. Assange decided to first exclusively provide three of the world’s

dominant international media organisations with equal access to its content, because

he wanted a guarantee that the large cache of data would be received in a way that

ensured wide ranging global scrutiny and he believed the high profile of the three

organisations selected would maximise public reach (Hendler, 2010).

Evgeny Morozov says, “WikiLeaks badly needs its media partners”, but “it’s not

clear that media partners actually need WikiLeaks” (Morozov, 2011). His argument

suggests that the analysis and contextualisation of the data required for mass

audience consumption, the kind Assange hoped for, could not have been done by

WikiLeaks alone. He believes that while WikiLeaks “has the capacity to attract more

leaks… it doesn’t have the matching capacity to make sense of them” (Morozov,

2011). While WikiLeaks policy is to make all of the data it receives available on its

website so that its readers can analyse, scrutinise and make up their own minds about

what they think is the truth, in this case the cache of cables was not published on the

219

WikiLeaks website until after they were storified and distributed to a global audience

by the professional news media. Evgeny Morozov says one of the problems with

publishing raw data such as this for crowdsourced analysis is that it risks being

hijacked by those with political agendas (Morozov, 2011). Kate Crawford says the

notion of “data” is often equated with “fact” based on its relationship with “math”

and as such, offers a promise of certainty. However, like Rogers (2011), she points

out that data is “only as good as the people using it” (Hardy, 2013). Rogers suggests

that while the technology has improved the ways in which data is managed, it is still

essential to have “humans who understand the issues” (Rogers, 2011) to tell the

story.

Anthony Lilley sees professionals as the bearers of wisdom and the crowd as sources

of information and combined “these elements of content creation have the capacity to

be ‘hugely powerful’” (Lilley, 2007). He argues traditional news media “should be

aiming to embody an army of experts with real heartbeats and social capital” (Lilley,

2007), which is exactly the Guardian’s objective.

Topic Indexation

Information published on the Guardian website is much more complex than that

which is available in print editions. With metadata such as ‘Help’ pages, ‘About’

pages, tags, links columns, embedded links, and so on, there is much more to story

production than there was in the past. An advantage of publishing in digital

environments is that it is much easier to search for content using digital classification

and indexing systems. Approximately 8,500 topic indexes had been generated to

2011 (Belam & Martin, 2011). Tags, that is, a set of keywords, are embedded into

the metadata of each story on every page of the Guardian website. The indexes are

automatically searched for the tags of each story to generate related topic pages, a

task that if done manually would take more resources than the organisation has

access to (Belam & Martin, 2011).

Social Media

In efforts to create a bridge between the audience and the organisation, the Guardian

has created new news positions, called community coordinators, to present the voice

of the community to the newsroom (British Broadcasting Corporation, 2011b).

220

Community coordinators use social media to encourage conversation and extend

relationships with the public, to identify gaps in community engagement and to find

and develop new ideas about interactivity and story telling. Coordinators maintain

metrics, which track the number of reader assisted stories and maintains contact lists

of the readers who have contributed to story development (Tinworth, 2012).

While the Guardian now competes to some extent with social media, it also uses it as

part of its daily operations to help tell better stories, to reflect its values, to enhance

interactivity and conversation with audiences on and off site, and to improve its role

as a service for the public interest by providing information and/or “changing the

world’s perspectives on a particular situation” (British Broadcasting Corporation,

2011b). Platforms such as Twitter are used to find out what is happening, search,

harness the knowledge of the crowd, aggregate information and content, report and

distribute information, market itself, participate in conversations, listen, collaborate,

collect feedback and to create community (Rusbridger, 2010b) (Cartablog, 2009). In

an effort to gather and present diverse perspectives on issues and events, and to

encourage public engagement with the news, and interactivity with the newsroom,

the Guardian will ask the public to find and tweet the most interesting and important

comment and analysis emerging in the hours immediately following a significant

news event (Indvik, 2012). The Guardian will highlight the issue or event by

summarising what has happened, and signifying the certainties and uncertainties

about how the issue impacts the social world. The newsroom asks the public to flag

news, political, expert and academic opinion using the hashtag #smartlakes (Indvik,

2012). While the idea to use Twitter to aggregate content is not original, the idea to

use it to crowdsource a specific kind of content was developed by Alexis Madrigal at

the Atlantic in 2010 during the WikiLeaks event (Madrigal, 2010).

Comparing the use of Twitter as a search tool to Google, Rusbridger argues that

Twitter harnesses “the mass capabilities of human intelligence to the power of

millions in order to find information that is new, valuable, relevant or entertaining”

(Rusbridger, 2010b). He says Twitter provides him with the daily news of the world

for free, when in the past gathering the same news may have cost him more than

100,000 pounds.

221

The crowd now, to an extent, influences the news values in Guardian newsrooms

and peer-to-peer authority is replacing the opinions of those traditionally referred to

as experts (Rusbridger, 2010b). While Rusbridger suggests the Guardian has

embraced Twitter, he also points to its flaws and makes it clear that many of the links

on Twitter are to “legacy-media companies” (Rusbridger, 2010b).

The power of the Twitter platform and the phenomenon of the “mutualisation” of

news media became evident to Rusbridger when users of the social media platform

took on the task of reporting events that traditional news media were prevented from

reporting. A case in point was when an injunction prevented the Guardian from

reporting that a company called Trafigura had released toxic waste in the Ivory

Coast, causing illness and fatalities.157

The Guardian also uses Tumblr158 to publish stories, photos, video and audio. It

provides a diverse range of topics and connects with multiple and equally diverse

websites which are listed and remain static on the front page. The site is largely read

only, however the audience can “like” posts, an activity that publishes a link to the

reader’s personal website. This is an interactive and collaborative activity since it

provides Guardian readers with links to external sites of information.

Conclusion

This chapter has described the founding principles of the Guardian’s business model,

which show its interconnectedness with the principles of the Fourth Estate. This is

somewhat consistent with the BBC’s public service ethic, however it contrasts with

News Limited’s primary business strategy, which is to generate profits for

shareholders. While the Scott Trust was set up for the sole purpose of providing

financial support for the Guardian’s journalism, the global financial crisis and the

cultural shift from the industrial to the information economy have caused problems

for other aspects of its business model. In keeping with its mission to provide a civic

service, Editor-in-Chief Rusbridger has fully embraced the participatory and

collaborative practices of the new online-networked culture.

This chapter has shown that the Guardian was one of the first traditional news media

organisations to transition from its print platform to the online news environment and

222

to incorporate the participatory tools and technologies of the Internet into its

everyday practice. The reason for its early online transition came in response to the

growing online population and the organisation’s observation that the public’s news

consumption habits were changing. Like the BBC, the Guardian began to develop a

variety of interactive environments to ensure public debates were accessible to

people at all levels of education and social status.

The chapter presented editor/journalist/blogger Kevin Anderson’s account of best

practice for journalist/bloggers. This provided valuable insight into how Guardian

bloggers approach interaction with the public. While Chapter 3 described the

challenges of blogging, Anderson’s account of blogging at the Guardian provided a

real world example of how to effectively engage the public in ways that generate

considered and deliberative responses. Although Anderson agrees that blogging has

its challenges, he also believes, if managed thoughtfully, it can be an effective way

for journalists to have a meaningful conversation with the public.

The chapter has also shown that the Guardian has grown to realise that the sum of

public knowledge is greater than that contained in any newsroom, and as a result it

has taken a range of approaches to harnessing knowledge as part of their

conversation with the public. The Guardian’s opinion forum, Comment is Free, is

part of its initiative to create a more participatory, interactive and open style of

journalism. The chapter also provided examples of the ways in which the Guardian

uses crowdsourcing and networked journalism to fulfil its role as the Fourth Estate.

The Guardian’s crowdsourced investigation of UK MP’s expenses, and its

collaboration with WikiLeaks and other more traditional news organisations on

sorting, verifying, contextualising and analysing large amounts of leaked top-secret

data, exemplifies its enthusiasm to use Web 2.0 tools and technologies to tackle a

broad range of new challenges to the ever evolving politics of journalism.

136 The Scott Trust Foundation supports the Scott Trust Charitable Fund and the Guardian Foundation for the distribution of bursaries and grants. It also maintains archive material and organises education activities and exhibitions. http://www.gmgplc.co.uk/the-scott-trust/purpose/. 137 The Guardian suffered a financial loss of nearly £37m in 2011, £5m more than the previous year, with a higher loss expected in 2012 (Wilby, 2012).

223

138 Alan Rusbridger’s complete profile outlining editorial roles and Board memberships with the Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/global/2010/aug/26/alan-rusbridger-profile 139 The Guardian US was launched by Editor-in-Chief Janine Gibson in 2012. http://www.guardiannews.com/ 140The Guardian Australia was launched by Editor-in-Chief Katharine Viner, May 27 2013. http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/insideguardian/2013/may/26/welcome-to-guardian-australia 141 Comment is Free publishes comment and debate. It was created and named in accordance with the tradition and values espoused by CP Scott in his 1921 essay A Hundred Years: “Comment is free but facts are sacred” (Scott, 1921). 142 Guardian Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/search/groups/?q=the%20guardian 143 Guardian YouTube Channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/theguardian?feature=results_main 144 Guardian Open Platform: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/pda/2010/may/20/guardian-open-platform 145 Guardian: guardian.co.uk 146 The contact details of editors and the moderation team—cif.moderation@Guardian.co.uk—are published on the Guardian website (Guardian News & Media, 2008). 147 The Guardian’s guidelines for participation are available here: http://www.Guardian.co.uk/community-standards 148 The Guardian is receptive to particular circumstances where anonymity reduces risk to personal safety (Willmott, 2010) 149 The Huffington Post entered the UK news market in 2011. 150Air America Media: http://airamerica.com/ 151 Guardian Datastore Flickr Group Pool: http://www.flickr.com/groups/Guardiandatastore/pool/ 152 Guardian Datastore: http://www.Guardian.co.uk/data 153 Guardian Datastore: http://twitter.com/#!/datastore 154 The Guardian’s final tally of the number of documents supports this assertion (see Figure 5.1): “We have 458,832 pages of documents. 28,755 of you have reviewed 224,485 of them. Only 234,347 to go...” (2013). 155 Top-secret data includes The Afghan and Iraq war logs and the American embassy cables. Leigh and Harding (2011) WikiLeaks: Inside Julian Assange's War On Secrecy. London: Guardian Books, provide a detailed description about the circumstances of how WikiLeaks and later the news organisations came into possession of the data, as does Beckett & Ball (2012) WikiLeaks: News In The Networked Era. London: Polity Press. 156 See Columbia Journalism Review for detailed description about how the Guardian’s reporter, Nick Davies, persuaded Julian Assange to share the leaked documents with the Guardian before the rest of the world. This account also describes the way the New York Times and Der Spiegel became involved. 157An archived history of the Trafigura issue: http://www.Guardian.co.uk/world/trafigura-probo-koala and: http://www.BBC.co.uk/search/news/trafigura. 158 The Guardian Tumblr is published at http://guardian.tumblr.com/

224

Chapter 7 The Elements that Shape the Politics of

Journalism

“I am struck by the fact that what the BBC does is covered by quite

different rules to what the Guardian or News International does, and yet

you could look at their websites and on the face of it, they’re doing

similar things” (Leveson Inquiry, 2012).

The transition from traditional news platforms to the digital environment has had a

profound impact on the politics of journalism in a number of key areas, including the

business, the practice, its values and ethics, and its relationships with professional

and non-professional entities and with the public.

This chapter will show that the impact of Web 2.0 technologies on the politics of

journalism in discrete media models is varied and complex, mainly because

journalism is created in a diversity of particular institutional and organisational

frameworks and conditions. Therefore, the practices and uses of journalism are not

only multidimensional but are often distinct, since they serve different purposes. The

chapter is framed by theories of journalism, including Fourth Estate, networked

journalism and objectivity, and theories of deliberation and participation.

Fourth Estate theory proposes that news media have a responsibility to the public to

ensure individuals are informed about the complexities of the social, political and

economic spheres of society. It requires news media to be inclusive of a diversity of

viewpoints on a wide range of topics. This thesis supports the notion that the role of

the journalist is to monitor the powerful, to ensure government fulfils its obligations

to citizens and to expose corruption. However, it has found that different news

organisations throughout the world function for different purposes and, in some

instances the values and interests of particular media owners may be what provide

the framework for some media messages, rather than serving the best interests of the

public.

225

The Web 2.0 environment has provided traditional news media and new independent

journalism entities, such as OhmyNews and WikiLeaks for example, with new

opportunities to cultivate participation and collaboration, and to contribute to the

public conversation in what has now become a digitally networked model of

journalism. Each news media entity, whether a traditional or non-traditional model,

now uses a much broader range of tools and technologies of journalism to tell stories

about the world.

This research has shown there are distinct differences in the ways in which the

different models of news approach the notion of deliberation, participation and

networked journalism, each of which is governed by the values and interests of the

particular organisation.

Taking a bottom-up approach, the following discussion begins with a comparative

analysis of the business and value systems for each media model to provide a basis

from which to understand how each approaches journalism. It then briefly compares

the reasons for the online transition of each of the traditional news organisations. In

this section, the discussion focuses on the ways in which elements of participatory,

interactive and networked journalism impact on the way news organisations

determine news values, set the agenda and serve the public interest. The final section

examines the impact of the democratisation of journalism on the elements that shape

journalism, including objectivity and impartiality.

7.1 Business and Value Systems

Each media organisation is defined by a particular business model, which ultimately

determines its value system. BBC News aims to provide a trusted and truthful news

service that is inclusive of individuals in all sections of UK society and of

international publics. Since it is funded by a license fee paid by every UK household,

it has the unique financial capacity to extend its public service beyond the

fundamental requirements of journalism as defined by theories of the Fourth Estate.

This means it can conduct research and development initiatives that allow the BBC to

foster the uptake of digital technologies by the general public and to ensure citizens

are equipped with the skills required to participate in the discursive, computer-based

226

network of public spheres. Research initiatives undertaken by the BBC also maintain

the newsroom’s professional standards of journalism practice and innovation, and

ensure the services provided by BBC News meet the aims and objectives set by the

Royal Charter.

As a commercially funded news organisation, News Limited’s journalism is often

observed in terms of how well it can maintain its independence from parent company

News Corporation’s business and political interests, and how well it can preserve its

obligation to its role as a member of the Fourth Estate while simultaneously

maximising profit and increasing shareholder value. News Limited’s business model

is heavily reliant on financial returns gained through its journalism. The review of

the literature has shown that News Corporation’s news holdings are struggling

financially, and rely on the profits of its other holdings to sustain them. For most

businesses such ongoing losses would be untenable, however News Corporation,

perhaps uniquely, is––so far––willing and able to absorb such losses.

Economist Diane Coyle contends that there is currently very little reason for

established businesses to stick with their failing business models other than “they

have done it for a very long time” (Confino, 2012) and are therefore reluctant to

change. While there are several narratives driving technological change, Coyle

highlights two key points. The first is that much of the social and economic system is

in a state of distress as a result of outdated strategies deeply embedded in business

culture, and the second is that participation is a crucial new business strategy. In the

context of these points, she suggests that struggling companies may do well, first to

respond to the social changes that are having a dramatic impact on their existence,

and second to reconsider the purpose of their business, their core competencies and

the products they want to focus on. Then, she suggests companies ought to consider

what kind of good they aim to do for the economy, society and their business. She

calls for business aims and strategies to return to their broader role of providing a

service to society, and to re-focus on customers rather than profit maximisation

(Confino, 2012). It is from this perspective that she identifies one of the key

challenges for business, which is to embrace participatory practices into its culture.

227

This is particularly important for news organisations struggling with their business

models and attempting to better connect with the public. The public ought to be able

to trust that news media institutions reflect honest and reliable representations of the

social world, particularly the key issues affecting the lives of individuals, and society

at large. When news media fail to address social problems, especially society’s

inherent inequalities, the public are more likely to bypass mainstream news media

and form social movements independent of traditional communication channels. The

Occupy movement is an example of a networked social revolution that traditional

news media did not see coming and was “hard-pressed” to understand and represent

truthfully (Castells, 2011).

Chapter 5 has shown that one of the main problems for News Limited has long been

the conflict between its obligation to shareholders and its social responsibility to the

public interest. It also showed that it was reluctant to move its business online while

its traditional print journalism business model continued to support these divergent

factors. In contrast the Guardian does not suffer the same conflict because in

addition to its commercial revenues, its operations are largely funded by a private

Trust. Therefore it does not have any obligation to shareholders, but rather its

financial returns are used only to support its journalism.

The literature shows that the Guardian’s Editor-in-Chief Alan Rusbridger recognises

the risks of not serving the public interest, and not being inclusive of its audience.

The Guardian’s approach to networked journalism, or as Rusbridger describes it,

“open journalism”, can be understood as the organisation’s response to the social and

cultural changes brought about by rapidly changing technologies. Moreover, its

approach to innovation sees it step beyond the traditional practices of journalism to

find new ways to encourage further innovation.

Chapter 6 has shown that the Guardian takes a more participatory approach to

journalism than News Limited, for instance, mainly because its purpose is grounded

in its obligation to the public interest and connecting with the social world. This is

evident in the range of interactive channels it has created for citizen entry to the

public debate. The inclusion of a diversity of voices on a wide range of topics in the

Comment is Free section, and the comprehensive social networking, blogging, and

228

comment forums, collectively contribute to the fulfilment of some of the key

elements of journalism—objectivity, impartiality, balance and transparency—which

enhances the organisation’s role as a member of the Fourth Estate and can also be

seen as a democratising mechanism.

Financial Problems, Paywalls And The Fourth Estate

This research has placed considerable emphasis on the financial problems facing the

commercial news media compared to the publicly funded media model. However,

the BBC is not without its own financial problems. While some of the BBC’s

competitors have expressed resentment for some of the benefits afforded to BBC

News by virtue of the corporation’s business model (J. Murdoch, 2009), recent

problems159 surrounding certain editorial processes within the BBC News fold have

cast doubt over its financial capacity to continue to produce the high quality

investigative reports that the public has grown to expect and feels entitled to.

Cutbacks to the budgets of a number of popular journalism programs, including

Newsnight, have left editors and journalists over worked and under resourced. The

impact of the “succession of cutbacks” (Tillotson, 2012) on the BBC’s ability to

produce reliable investigative journalism has been described as nothing short of

disastrous. Newsnight presenter Jeremy Paxman says:

“Over the last three years we've been required to make budget cuts of

15%… We have lost producers, researchers and reporters. Nor can we

make the films we once made. “Now we're told we are likely to have to

make more cuts: at least a further 20% over five years. It is

unsustainable, and I cannot see how the programme can survive in

anything like its current form if the cuts are implemented” (Plunkett,

2012).

Aside from undermining its credibility as a reliable source of news, recent events in

the Newsnight newsroom have provided the BBC’s ideological opponents with

arguments, based on trust and relevance, that are being used as justification for calls

to dismantle BBC news services even further. While the ideological divide between

the BBC and others is beyond the scope of this research, the financial strain being

imposed has without a doubt had a negative impact on the BBC’s ability to meet the

229

obligations of its Charter in the fashion that the British public has grown accustomed

to. In that light, the structures that maintain BBC’s reputation as the most trusted

news service in the UK are at risk of being removed or at least reduced by its

“commercial rivals” (Beckett, 2013).

The financial difficulties experienced by News Limited publications and the

Guardian were described and analysed in Chapters 5 and 6. Although Kim Williams

contends that News Limited is “doing well”, as mentioned earlier the broader picture

of News Limited shows that it continues to be financially supported by the profits of

other areas of the parent corporation holdings. While the Guardian is partially

supported by income generated through commercial means, it too is increasingly

experiencing financial strain due to the declining holdings of its private Trust.

News Limited’s financial problems have led to the implementation of a subscription

model for online journalism as a way of generating income. In contrast, the

Guardian has refrained from doing the same for fears that it will have a negative

impact on its ability to interact with all sectors of society. According to News

Limited, one of the added benefits of its subscription model is that it enables the

organisation to better know and market to its audience. The subscription process is

said to improve its ability to match advertisers with a niche online audience

comprised of a demographic most likely to positively interact with the marketing of

its products. A clearly defined demographic enables consumer-oriented companies to

better target audiences, which makes their investment in the online environment

more financially beneficial to them and to News Limited shareholders. Kim

Williams’ recent lecture to the Melbourne Press Club presented a strong focus on

ways of “managing new opportunities for advertising and other forms of revenue

generation such as different payment models” (Melbourne Press Club, 2012). This

contrasts with the views of the Guardian’s Editor-in-Chief, whose approach to open

journalism, labelled by Williams as “woolly” (Melbourne Press Club, 2012), aims to

ensure the publication remains inclusive of and accessible to every individual

regardless of his or her willingness or capacity to pay.

This research has shown that the Guardian’s methods of addressing its financial

problems are rooted in how it perceives its obligation as a member of the Fourth

230

Estate. Editor-in-Chief Rusbridger has intensified the publication’s capacity to use a

variety of channels for communication, all of which convey a diversity of voices on a

broad range of topics, that in turn generates more information and more interest in

the news site. The introduction of Comment is Free and the daily publication of its

news list160 are examples of this commitment. Rusbridger takes a similar view to

network analyst Castells (2012), who suggests that in order for a network to grow, it

needs to connect. If people are prevented from connecting to the network, for

example because of a paywall, then that not only limits equality of access, but it also

limits the organisation’s growth.

At the Guardian and the BBC websites, everyone has access and anybody can enter

and participate in any and all of the many deliberative environments, whereas at the

Australian for instance, only those who pay can participate in certain forums. News

Limited editors respond to criticisms that paywalls limit participation by pointing out

that only its niche content requires a subscription fee, and so non-subscribers can still

access its blogs free of charge. However, the blogs do not offer the same niche

content that is available behind the paywall. Opinions about the benefits and

challenges of paywalls continue to be divided, and while this thesis does not attempt

to provide a solution to the question of how best to raise revenue, it does identify the

challenges it poses to the role of journalism as a member of the Fourth Estate, and

thus to the democratisation of journalism.

Newsroom Cutbacks

The global economic downturn, failing business models, and the increased flow of

information enabled by the Internet, has forced many traditional news organisations,

print in particular, to undertake dramatic budget cuts. This translates to a loss of

staff, largely those responsible for essential specialist and international reporting, and

a collapse of news media share prices. Newsroom closures and staff cuts have been

most prevalent in the United States, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Spain

(S. Oh, 2010: 4).

Contemporary newsrooms are now largely under-resourced, meaning there is less

scope for the levels of in-depth investigations, “less foreign and national news, less

space devoted to science, the arts, features and a range of specialized subjects”

231

(Rosenstiel, 2008) and less original reporting than was possible with more staff in the

past. The industry is now comprised of fewer journalists, mostly “younger, more

tech-savvy… serving the demands of both print and the web… [with] less

institutional memory, less knowledge of the community… [and] fewer editors to

catch mistakes” (Edmonds, 2006) and who are required to do more work than their

predecessors.

Instead of deploying most of their journalists to the field, many newsrooms have now

become more reliant upon news wire services, social media and independent,

digitally native journalism entities such as Storyful, Demotix and Ushahidi (See

Appendix F for a description of each of these). There is now less time for

professional journalists to follow-up and expand on public interest issues and topics,

particularly since in the new highly competitive 24/7 digital news cycle, journalists

are required to file instantly. BBC editor, Kevin Marsh, says “it is hard for journalists

to file immediately; editors and managers need to identify good stories and give them

more time” (Marsh, 2011).

The consequence of cutbacks is reduced quality—an “erosion of substance”

(Edmonds, 2006)—and reduced quantity of published content. The predicament in

which the news industry finds itself manifests as a public perception that professional

journalism sometimes appears to take a superficial approach to “monitoring the

powerful” (Gitlin, 2009) and that it fails to provide the kind of service expected by

the civic public. Rosenstiel contends the problem is more acute at bigger news

publications than smaller ones. He says when the numbers of news workers fall,

“more of life occurs in shadows” (Rosenstiel, 2009a). In the wake of WikiLeaks, and

in the glow of entities such as Storyful, Demotix and Ushahidi, the practice of

networked journalism considerably alleviates this concern. News organisations can

now draw from and triangulate the specialist work of these organisations to provide

more in-depth context and analysis for a wide range of issues and events. Rather than

independent media supplanting traditional media as originally feared, it has become

an essential support network.

232

International Journalism: Wounded in the Crisis, Patched Up by the Web

A 2000 study by Barnett, Seymour and Gaber on the changing trends in British

television news 1975–1999 identified the disparity between the coverage of foreign

news by commercial organisations outside of the UK and the BBC. The study found

“a healthy balance of serious, light and international” news coverage in the UK,

which contrasted with other parts of the world161 where “highly commercialised”

organisations focused on “crime, showbiz, trivia or human-interest stories” (Barnett,

Seymour, & Gaber, 2000: 12). It also found that all of the content on Britain’s

television news was dominated by “foreign and broadsheet content” (Barnett et al.,

2000: 12). Barnett et al. concluded that the UK had maintained a remarkably robust

and broadly serious approach to television news, due partly to “the presence of a

well-funded public broadcaster” and partly to the regulatory obligations that enabled

healthy commercial competition, which produced an environment where important

home and foreign news could co-exist alongside lighter content (Barnett et al., 2000:

13).

The inclusion of international journalism in mainstream news coverage has always

been supported by the desire of people to know what is happening beyond their own

community, and for the high levels of prestige that it generated for news

organisations (Sambrook, 2011). As mentioned in previous chapters, the last 20 years

has seen a significant decline in the number of foreign bureaus and in the incidence

of investigative reporting. This loss is counterproductive to journalism’s primary

civic responsibility and is the outcome of three major changes: the economy, new

technology and globalisation (Sambrook, 2011).

Sambrook says it was initially the global economic crisis that forced many

organisations to reduce staffing levels in their foreign bureaus, with many simply

shutting down.162 As a result, the demand for higher productivity levels in the

remaining bureaus has increased, with fewer journalists covering more territory and

filing more stories “on all sorts of different platforms” (Alford, 2008; Sambrook,

2011).

The impact of Web 2.0 technologies on foreign newsgathering has posed both

challenges and benefits to the business models and practices of journalism. The cost

233

of the industry’s transition online has been extraordinarily high, with all news

organisations having to invest in new digital and mobile services and platforms,

websites and broadcasting that requires 24–hour channels. The need to service

multiple channels has meant that, “rather than taking savings out of new technology,

costs have gone into [creating and maintaining] new platforms” (Sambrook, 2011).

News organisations are no longer the only sources of news information available to

the public, because Internet technologies allow people to go directly to the original

source. Many Non-Government Organisations (NGOs) and businesses now distribute

their own news using a variety of communication channels including social media

(Sambrook, 2010: 2; 2011). While social media has been shown to play a significant

role during political conflicts, natural disasters and crises, society still places great

value on those foreign correspondents that risk their lives to report events in hard to

reach places such as Libya, for example (Sambrook, 2011). Sambrook says that

without their “first-hand, eye-witness reports” (Sambrook, 2011), the world would

have known nothing of what was happening there during the 2011 civil war.

Sambrook contends the impact of globalisation on news has been two fold

(Sambrook, 2011). First, Web 2.0 technologies have enabled the globalisation of

news, which means it is much more difficult for journalists to get away with

inaccurate and/or incomplete reports about remote locales because the people in

those places can now instantly respond online to explain what is really happening.

Second, with the increased movement of people across borders, less of the news is

foreign. That is, given that countries like the UK and Australia are now comprised of

a higher percentage of multicultural residents than in the past, news audiences may

view news stories about particular parts of Asia, for example, as home news rather

than foreign news (Sambrook, 2010: 59; 2011).

Maria Balinska, a former editor of World Current Affairs Radio at the BBC, adds

another dimension to the impact of globalisation on international news. She says

journalists can now use Web 2.0 technologies to facilitate international debate on a

range of issues by using the practices of networked journalism to “engage the

audience as never before” (Balinska, 2010). For example, given that health insurance

organisations now provide services on a global scale, questions about equity of care,

234

the costs and benefits of health insurance and the value of health insurance to health

systems are topics that the news media can explore in an international context via

Web 2.0 environments.

Before the Internet, most foreign correspondents were white, male and middle class,

and they often relied on locals to help them with language barriers, but now

traditional newsrooms frequently use freelancers who are multilingual and local to

the region (Sambrook, 2011). Digital technologies have created more opportunities

for newsrooms to network with a more culturally diverse cohort of staff who have in-

depth knowledge of the region, and therefore can provide better context to issues and

events than perhaps an outsider can (Sambrook, 2011). Sambrook emphasises the

importance for world news to include a cultural connection between what they are

reporting and the people they are reporting to. He says: “it is more important than

ever that when we report this interconnected world, that [foreign

correspondents/journalists] make that bridge, a cultural bridge, to the people they are

reporting to” (Sambrook, 2011).

Similarly, Solana Larsen, managing editor of Global Voices, recognises the

importance of reporting stories in ways that are “respectful of the culture, opinions

and interests” (Larsen, 2010) from which they originate. She uses Web 2.0

technologies to provide a platform to give voice to people “from almost everywhere”

in the world and to help “international journalists reach bloggers who offer a

citizen’s perspective”163 (Larsen, 2010). She suggests that “if all foreign news was

told by reporters who are native to the country where events happen… it would

change which stories are told, how they are reported, and how audiences respond to

them” (Larsen, 2010). This aligns with Nick Davies’ observation that the current

method of reporting international news generally involves journalists being flown

into a “trouble spot” and consulting with journalism’s traditional sources, which

mostly include their own embassy and other official sources. He contends these

reports ultimately produce “a consensus—and conservative—account of the world”

(Davies, 2009: 100).

Bill Schiller, the Asia bureau chief for The Toronto Star, expresses concern that

international journalism is now largely comprised of reports gathered from the

235

Internet rather than “shoe leather” reporting (Schiller, 2010). He says that even

though reporters have become increasingly “tech savvy” the need remains for them

to “get close enough to listen” and to understand what they hear (Schiller, 2010).

Challenges To The Fourth Estate By Commercial Journalism And/Or Ideology

This research has shown that it is not only the financial bases of news organisations

that distinguish one culture of journalism from another. Each case included in this

study is governed by different regulations depending on its country of origin and its

platform. The Guardian, for example, is subject to regulations defined by the Press

Complaints Commission, whereas the Australian Press Council164 regulates News

Limited, and Ofcom the BBC. Each regulatory body is as significant to democracy as

the other, and each news organisation functions within the framework particular to

the regulatory body to which it answers. Each regulatory framework aims to ensure

its members function within the defined rules and standards, which ultimately are

framed to ensure they maintain the trust and therefore the custom of the public.

These clearly defined frameworks are important considerations for any comparative

analysis between disparate media models because they each aim to guide the

performance of journalism in the public interest.165 Ideally, each organisation will

uphold its obligation to these principles, which correlate with those outlined in

theories of the Fourth Estate.

Concerns about the way media owners frame their publications in the context of their

own ideological interests rather than those of the public were amplified by the recent

Leveson Inquiry into the conduct of News Corporation’s News International

publication, News of the World, which was brought about by an in-depth

investigative journalism initiative carried out by the Guardian. The inquiry

highlighted the extent to which News Corporation’s news holdings have developed

connections between media, business, and the legal and political spheres that enable

the organisation to easily diffuse its ideological interests and mobilise power in ways

that impact on political decisions. This problem exemplifies one of the key

challenges to the theory of the Fourth Estate as it is described and defined in Chapter

2. Commercial news media that channel the commercial and ideological interests of

its proprietors have a different commitment to the interests and values of the

citizenry than the organisations primarily framed by a public service ethic.

236

The Leveson Inquiry has generated a lot of criticism and renewed uncertainty about

how news organisations should approach their role as news providers. The quote of

Lord Chief Justice Leveson that leads this chapter highlights the difficulty of

discerning the points of difference between the models. Indeed this thesis has

explained that the concerns about the commercial imperatives of journalism are

multidimensional, since they encompass the issues of raising revenue to fund

journalism, satisfying shareholders, and ensuring their methods do not conflict with

the law, the ethical standards of journalism as defined by the relevant regulatory

frameworks, and the founding principles of journalism as the Fourth Estate. On the

face of it, as Leveson points out, it appears the models in question are all very similar

(Bartlett, 2012), yet only by examining each from the bottom up,166 as has been done

in this thesis, can the points of difference become clear.

7.2 Web 2.0 Transforms Journalism

Chapters 4, 5 and 6 explained the reasons why each traditional news media model

transitioned from its traditional platform to the online environment. For the BBC, the

transition began as a way to draw audiences to its traditional broadcast platform. The

online platform was also perceived to be another way to interact with audiences,

which would enhance its understanding of the public interest. For the Guardian, the

transition occurred in response to growing online patronage and the realisation that

the Web would enable it to increase its civic value through interactivity with the

public. News Limited’s online transition occurred later than its UK counterparts, for

a number of reasons. The first is because it was uncertain about how it could make a

profit online. The second is because Australia had a slower uptake of broadband

technology than many countries in the Northern hemisphere, including the UK and

the US. In 2007, Robert Thomson said there was still a large number of people in

Australia using dial-up, which meant people could not quickly or easily download

multimedia content (Thomson, 2007). Therefore there was little benefit to the

organisation providing online content that was difficult for people to access, and to

do so would most likely frustrate individuals rather than help them. Finally, News

Limited was not pressured by competitors to establish an online presence because,

again unlike its counterparts in the Northern Hemisphere, the absence of significant

competition between media outlets in Australia (Carson, Wake, McNair, & Lidberg,

237

2012), resulting from News Limited’s high concentration of media ownership, meant

Australians had little choice but to continue to consume News Limited’s print

publications, particularly for local news.

While News Limited continued to remain profitable, there seemed to be no

imperative for it to invest financial and/or human resources into the incorporation of

interactive and participatory technologies into its day-to-day operations. News

Limited’s delayed transition online provides a clear contrast between the main aims

and objectives of each news organisation studied here, and it shows that News

Limited aims to use the platform that provides it with the most reach to transmit its

journalism for the purpose of generating profits for its shareholders. Conversely,

from the very beginning, the BBC and the Guardian were primarily concerned with

using the online platform to create a range of participatory environments.

Chapters 4 and 5 have shown the reasons why participation has become a key part of

the Guardian’s and the BBC’s professional strategy. Each media model, including

News Limited, now provides interactive environments to encourage different degrees

of participation in the deliberative process. However, there are benefits and

challenges to creating online deliberative environments. For instance, the BBC

comment forums provide citizens with an opportunity to engage with a range of

topics in the public interest. A forum may be associated with an article written by a

journalist or editor, or a question or topic posed by the Have Your Say program to

generate debate and conversation. Anyone is free to engage with the content via the

forum. A recurring concern about comment forums, as shown in Chapter 2, is the

question of whether participants are deliberative and whether their views are

representative of wider public opinion.

The forum attached to a BBC News story about the assassination of Pakistan’s Prime

Minister, Benazir Bhutto, is an example that shows there was little understanding and

moral respect between participants holding opposing points of view. Disrespect

between participants eventually reached a critical stage, whereby the BBC was

obligated to intervene, and to later provide the public with an explanation of its

intervention. While there was little reasoning and evaluation displayed by the public

238

in the comment thread, the BBC’s theoretical analysis reflected the qualities of

reciprocation, in itself an essential element of deliberation (Parkinson, 2006: 1381).

The following discussion draws on the reflections of BBC editor, Peter Horrocks,

expressed in a lecture to the University of Leeds' Institute of Communications

Studies on the BBC’s editorial policy, including its use of comment forums. It

describes and analyses the ethical difficulties experienced by the news organisation

during exchanges of public opinion in the comment forums, Have Your Say and the

BBC Blog Network.

One of the BBC’s concerns while covering the Bhutto assassination, beyond the

primary news reports, was how much attention and consideration—in other words,

BBC News resources—should be allocated to the large public response in the

comment forums, particularly the Have Your Say forum. A large percentage of the

comments expressed anti-Muslim sentiment, which raised questions in the newsroom

about their relevance and whether they added value to the conversation. The

moderation policy for the comment forum, at the time, was designed to allow users

to post comments and to recommend the comments of others as most useful.

Horrocks said the posts that comprehensively attacked Islam generated the highest

number of recommendations, “most of them weren’t making distinctions between

different aspects of Islam, they were simply damning the religion as a whole”

(Horrocks, 2008a). At this point, editors faced a dilemma. They became concerned

that the significant imbalance of viewpoints might be seen as being representative of

BBC news values, while at the same time they had to consider whether the comments

should influence the editorial direction of this topic at the BBC.

This highlights a significant problem faced by many news organisations providing

comment forums for user participation. In this instance the majority of comments

were not inclusive of others, they were not amenable to the position of those with

opposing views, and a moral understanding between participants was not reached on

any level. Horrocks said the most valuable comments, “insights from those who had

met Benazir or knew her” and “valuable eyewitness comments from people who

were at the scene in Rawalpindi” were not as highly recommended as those opposing

239

Muslims (Horrocks, 2008a). Overall, the forum failed to add any useful information

to that which was already available to the public.

Horrocks’ reflection reveals the BBC’s strong commitment to providing all citizens

with equal access to a forum enabling the expression of individual viewpoints on a

particular topic, even though the dominant view, in this case, was in opposition to the

values of the BBC and the wider public. On the question of whether the comments in

this instance ought to have influenced the editorial direction of the newsroom,

Horrocks points out that the news site receives ten thousand emails and posts each

day compared to five million daily visitors, which means approximately 0.2 per cent

of all visitors choose to comment. He says,

“We cannot just take the views that we receive via e-mails and texts and

let them dictate our agenda. Nor should they give us a slant around which

we should orient our take on a story. At their best, they are an invaluable

information resource and an important corrective to groupthink. They

very often ask direct or apparently naïve questions that get to the heart of

the subject” (Horrocks, 2008a).

The BBC platforms available to the public for comment and discussion provided an

opportunity for citizens to deliberate on a topic of public interest within a defined

public sphere. Citizens were able to retain and modify their own views and also had

the opportunity to coerce those holding dissenting views (Horrocks, 2008a). While

this particular forum was dominated by a specific line of thinking, BBC journalists

were able to extract “thoughtful or surprising views and opinion” (Horrocks, 2008a),

which were buried deep in the forum, for its own editorial purposes. It also provided

citizens with the opportunity to deliberate on what was an important topic for UK

and international publics.

The comments in this forum exemplify the impenetrable, entrenched cultural and

political beliefs that have persisted across generations. Arguments based on religious,

ethnic and social groupings stir the emotions of people in a way that undermine the

possibility for an effective exchange of ideas and opinion. The event serves as an

example of the kind of situation described by Jane Mansbridge, where conflict

240

continues regardless of the opportunities for deliberation. This particular example is

indicative of what Mansbridge describes as an “enclave” model of democratic

deliberation, whereby groups exclude others from their conversation and simply

reject anything outside of their own beliefs. This prevents others from critiquing their

viewpoint (Mansbridge, 1999: 47), which therefore negates the act of deliberation.

Again, in the context of the BBC’s position, it is shown to be inclusive even where

some of the expressed views were in opposition to its own values. This example

shows the BBC theorizing and reflecting on its position and actions and thus

represents a move toward the democratisation of journalism.

Regardless of the outcomes represented in the BBC Benazir Bhutto forums, people in

deliberative democracies still require equal right of expression, which include

speaking time, access to channels of speech, and the right of response (Parkinson,

2006: 3). There is no reason to force people to accept a particular point of view and

equally “there is no reason to force people to be informed” (Parkinson, 2006). It is

not always the case that people react with the kind of emotion exhibited in the Bhutto

example. The deliberation process has the capacity to offer considered thought to

specific social and cultural identities (Dryzek, 2009: 1318). People approach political

debates in many ways: some are listeners, some participants, others uninterested or

unable to participate for a whole range of reasons (Parkinson, 2006: 3), and the

existence of multi-dimensional inequality prevents many from participating.

The single overarching concern in democratic societies is ensuring people have the

opportunity to be adequately informed (Coleman, 1999: 17) and to participate in

public debates. The use of comment forums by news organisations is one approach to

widening the scope of public discussion agendas. As news organisations develop and

reflect on the purpose, limitations and effectiveness of their comment systems, their

role as facilitators of democratic deliberation will further mature.

Citizen Participation: News Values, the Public Interest and Setting the Agenda

Citizen participation has a significant impact on journalism’s ability to monitor

power, to get a sense of the stories that matter to people, and to set the news agenda.

The BBC describes the way it communicates with the public as a “two way street”

(Eltringham, 2008). Vicky Taylor says the use of Web 2.0 technologies provides the

241

BBC newsroom with “a true voice and a true reflection of what is happening”

(Taylor, 2008). Even with technology as simple as email newsrooms can quickly

identify the mood, popularity and reach of any story (Taylor, 2008).

For the most part, the BBC sets the topics for discussion and then the people have the

conversation. The newsroom sees itself as a global notice board and having a

conversation with the world. Interactive spaces are designed to ensure everybody is

included in the conversation, and anybody can participate (see Figure 7.1). In

keeping with its Charter, the BBC seeks to ensure all topics of discussion are of

international interest, and encourages a macro conversation amongst many, rather

than micro conversation between a couple of individuals (Taylor, 2008). In that light,

it has incorporated particular courses of action into the moderation process to

discourage individuals seeking to dominate message and blog comment forums.

Each of the traditional news organisations included in this research has expressed

concern about people who try to hijack conversations with specific ideological

viewpoints. For example the Guardian “website publishes around 600,000 comments

a month, with 2,600 people [each] posting more than 40 comments a month” (Elliott,

2012). A closer examination of these statistics by Martin Belam found at least four

commenters who had left over 1,500 comments between them in a single month. 167

Similarly, George Megalogenis found that some individuals consistently posted large

numbers of comments across the Australian’s website (Megalogenis, 2009).

All of the journalists who participated in this research said that they constantly check

the comment forums for interesting angles in every debate. According to Taylor, the

BBC aims to identify a diversity of viewpoints so that it may present interviews that

depart from traditional and dominant opinion (Taylor, 2008). Stories that exhibit a

strong social resonance are usually pushed high on the agenda. An example of this

occurred following a BBC radio interview in which the Archbishop of Canterbury

made comments proposing the adoption of some portions of Sharia Law168 in the

UK. To the surprise of BBC producers, thousands of lunchtime audience members

responded to the Archbishop’s comments. The reaction was “dramatic, unusual and

unexpected” (Eltringham, 2008). By 6 pm, and following 37,000 emails, the BBC

had responded to the public interest by pushing the story up the agenda to lead the

242

news bulletin. Eltringham said, on this occasion, “the media had underestimated the

resonance that the Archbishop’s remarks had on the audience” (Eltringham, 2008,

2010). While the story originated in the UK where the dominant view opposes the

adoption of Sharia Law, it generated public opinion from around the world. The

international view, which in this case was mostly from the Middle East, was largely

supportive of the Archbishop’s viewpoint (Taylor, 2008).

Figure 7.1. The range of participatory channels of communication used by each of the media models

included in this study. The News Limited column describes the communication channels used by its

national publication, the Australian.

243

Taylor says, when the newsroom receives a flood of emails on a particular topic, it

provides a strong sense of the range of views (Taylor, 2008). A diversity of

viewpoints on any issue makes the debate more interesting and therefore it is more

likely that the public will engage. Moreover, in terms of views that cross the political

spectrum, the Internet serves as a ubiquitous platform. And for the BBC, which has

to be global, the use of Web 2.0 technologies enables it to harness a diversity of

opinion (Taylor, 2008).

User-generated Content

A clear point of difference between each of the organisations studied here is the

extent to which each includes citizen-produced content into their news feeds. The

Guardian and the BBC are much more likely to incorporate solicited and un-solicited

user-generated content into their news feed than the Australian, for example, with the

BBC also incorporating it explicitly into its organisational workflow. Both the

Guardian and the BBC have stated that the reason behind their inclusion of user-

generated content is to create diversity and to enable more of the public more

opportunity to see their own lives reflected in the news. They contend they have

explicitly aimed to find ways to bring the public into the news process, to collaborate

and converse with individuals on as many levels as is possible.

News Limited, on the other hand, retains a more traditional approach, placing greater

value on the perspectives of its own journalists when presenting debates about issues

such as “contemporary racism” (Melbourne Press Club, 2012) or the impact of the

Australian government’s carbon tax on Australian citizens and/or the economy, for

example. Australia’s national newspaper continues to prefer to dominate the

conversation with the viewpoints of its own journalists rather than those of the

public, which suggests it continues to position itself as a gatekeeper of information.

While the discussion with Andrew Bolt in Chapter 5 showed that he welcomes

comments from the public, his responses suggest he prefers the blog participants to

either be persuaded to adopt his point of view or agree with it and support it. Kevin

Anderson embraces the blog platform for its interactive capacities, but unlike Bolt he

says he never uses it to try to persuade people to accept his opinion. Rather, he uses

it as a method of conversing with the public on a range of issues and to identify and

understand the diverse elements of public opinion.

244

In contrast to the Guardian, which crowdsources opinion pieces for Comment is

Free, the Australian includes a Send Us Your Story Tips169 page on its website with

the link to it accessible on the website’s static footer. The page provides a form for

readers to send in their tips for stories that they think are important or that Australian

journalists might like to write about (Appendix E).

Collaboration

Each of the news organisations included in this study now engage, to various

degrees, in multiple collaborative practices with the audience and with independent

media entities. They can draw on the wisdom of the crowd for content and data

analysis, to assist with their reports, to encourage deliberative conversations on their

blogs and columns, and/or simply generate comments and traffic to their website via

social network channels.

Traditional journalism is now much more interactive and networked, which means it

is more inclusive of the audience, and therefore better able to reflect the public’s

shared experiences. Networked journalism comprises the old and new tools and

technologies of journalism to form partnerships and collaborations between

professional, independent and citizen informants, whether experts, witnesses or other

interested parties. Networked journalism has arrived on the back of the notion that

news media are no longer the gatekeepers of information and the idea that the

knowledge, expertise and life experience of the public outweighs that of most

newsrooms.

While the principle of networking has always been at the heart of journalism

practice, the use of Web 2.0 technologies by journalists to connect with sources has

added a new dimension to newsgathering and the distribution of information. This

research has shown that some journalists and organisations are more digitally

connected or networked than others. Another aspect of networked journalism now

includes alternative news media that operate independently of, yet complementary to,

traditional news organisations. The value of independently produced news media is

the inclusion of a greater diversity of opinion and different ways of seeing more of

the world incorporated into the public conversation.

245

7.3 The Impact of the Democratisation of Journalism on

Objectivity and Impartiality

Each of the established media organisations in this study has built a reputation for

authoritativeness and trust with the public over many years. Institutional journalism

has long been strengthened by key principles including independence, objectivity,

impartiality, truth, verification, accuracy and trust. The case studies have shown the

wide range of Web 2.0 tools and technologies used by different media models to

produce journalism that upholds these principles. The Internet has provided

opportunities for the public to be exposed to a greater diversity of voices and

opinion, which has made it much more difficult for incorrect or false reports to

remain unchallenged.

The concept of objectivity was first applied to the practice of journalism at the end of

the nineteenth century, and aims to provide news reports with a foundation of fact

and evidence (Sambrook, 2004; 2012: 3). It is on this basis that it is widely held to be

a legitimate element of journalism, used to produce independent, unbiased, credible,

accurate and reliable information (Atton & Hamilton, 2008b: 5; P. Meyer, 1991: 4;

Zelizer, 2004: 172).

However, many have highlighted problems with the concept of objectivity and have

argued that it is an inadequate framework for reporting the news (McNair, 2005: 32).

A common concern with objectivity focuses on the philosophical meaning of truth.

Nick Davies says the idea that a news organisation “simply collects and reproduces

the objective truth is a “classic Flat Earth tale… devoid of any reality” (Davies,

2009: 111). Others argue that the public does not read journalism as an “absolute

truth”, rather it understands that “a certain degree of relativism and subjectivity is

inevitable” (McNair, 2005: 32).

The normative view of objectivity argues that it is possible for reporters to identify

reality and truth, and can present these accurately and without bias (Windschuttle,

1998: 23). Sambrook contends that many of the assertions about the failings of

objectivity arise where the concepts of objectivity (used to identify and verify facts

and evidence) and impartiality (used to detect bias) are assumed to mean the same

246

thing (Sambrook, 2012: 5). The principles of objectivity involve the presentation of

the facts, which are supported with evidence, while the principles of impartiality are

used to “guarantee some accuracy, fairness and a proper range of views” (Tillotson,

2010). In this light, objectivity is about accountability (Hudson & Temple, 2010;

Singer, 2007: 64-86), examining the evidence to discover whether an account of an

event or situation holds up under scrutiny (Rosen, 2010b), and analysing

journalism’s findings and criticisms based on their relevance and value to the public.

Maurice Dunlevy describes two distinct approaches to reporting stories––using an

active and neutral voice––however he contends most journalists subscribe to

elements of both (Dunlevy, 1998: 122).

The neutral position means journalists detach their personal opinions from the story

and present a disinterested truth about events, issues and people (Davies, 2009).

Those who are seen to comply with this practice are usually regarded as watchdogs

of the public interest (McQuail, 2005: 284), who provide descriptive accounts of

issues and events using the usual elite and authoritative voices (for example,

politicians). The problem with this approach is that journalists’ decisions about

which voices audiences ought to hear are based on the “moral philosophy and a

political commitment” (Schudson, 1978: 8) of the journalist or the news organisation

producing the account.

Charlie Beckett argues that this formula for objectivity is not as solid as it is

perceived to be and, like Schudson (1978) and others, he says it is applied relative to

the purpose and “prevailing political norms” (Beckett, 2008a: 62) of any given

organisation (Hackett & Zhao, 1998; Zhao, 2012: 165). In other words, there is scope

for different organisations to attach different meaning and value to their principles

for their own purpose. However, Beckett remains confident that professional

journalists have the ability to independently judge sources, evaluate competing

arguments and represent a truthful version of reality (Beckett, 2008a: 63).

Jay Rosen criticises the notion of objectivity, arguing that it reduces reports to a “he

said, she said” (Rosen, 2009) formula, which largely serves to create “false balance”

(Rosen, 2009). While journalists are naturally expected to actively engage with

247

political affairs, some argue that the methods required to be non-partisan do not

allow them to impart all that they know in a way that provides the public with the

most accurate account of what happened and why (McQuail, 2005: 285). The result

is that readers are presented with a range of conflicting opinions, which according to

Rosen, often leaves them “helpless in understanding where truth lies” (Rosen, 2009).

He contends that objectivity is “not so much a truth-telling strategy” as it is a

“refuge-seeking behavior” (Rosen, 2009). Gaye Tuchman said similar things more

than forty years ago when she argued that objectivity is little more than a “strategic

ritual protecting newspapermen from the risks of their trade” (Tuchman, 1972: 660).

Similarly, Cunningham says objectivity simply functions to protect journalists from

the consequences of what they write (Cunningham, 2003).

Rosen says that although the US political press believes itself to be savvy170 (Rosen,

2012b), it knowingly reports false and/or misleading assertions made by high profile

politicians without question or context during election campaigns. He says there is a

tendency for journalists to perpetuate popular narratives without grounding

assertions in “observable reality” (Rosen, 2010c), generally because they feel

obligated to remain detached from any kind of ideological position. Then, it is only

after politicians have used mainstream media channels to push their own political

ideologies before a mass audience that journalists begin a “post-truth”171 exposition

(Rosen, 2012b). In their attempt to appear impartial/even-handed, journalists proceed

to make flippant assertions, such as all politicians are the same or as Rosen puts it,

“there are no angels in politics” (Rosen, 2012a). Rosen says the picture of what is

happening “can be fatally distorted by the journalist’s need to demonstrate even-

handedness” (Rosen).

While calling for “a news standard that can better guide journalists and the public [in

a political environment] where government is bent on constructing a reality narrative

seemingly at odds with the facts and even with the democratic system itself” (W.

Bennett, Lawrence, & Livingston, 2007: 179),172 Bennett et al. also point to a further

problem where “journalists who depart from the narratives reported by the rest of the

press pack are typically challenged by their editors for not getting the story right”

(W. Bennett et al., 2007: 178).

248

Impartiality

Newspaper editor Kelvin MacKenzie173 contends nobody is impartial about anything

anymore, and says the concept has become irrelevant in the Web 2.0 enabled multi-

channel environment. Others argue that regardless of the high or low number of news

media channels, the public does not afford all organisations the same degree of trust

(Greenslade, 2010), with more confidence and reliance being placed in news services

that maintain a moral obligation to the public interest than those whose purpose is to

create “rich media owners” 174(Tillotson, 2010).

Sambrook observes that the increased number of channels of communication enabled

by Web 2.0 technologies has amplified opinion over evidence. Similarly, Tim

Markham raises concern that journalists have become more reliant upon sourcing

information from online environments, in place of original research175 (Markham,

2010: 87). Compounded by the shortage of newsroom resources required to

implement the discovery and verification procedures needed to produce impartial

reports, online information is increasingly filtered through second and third-hand

sources, which by those stages have been recycled to the point where they are part of

an “echo chamber” (Markham, 2010: 87) rather than sources of original information.

Additionally, while digital environments provide news organisations with more

publishing space than was available to them on print and broadcast platforms,

smaller cohorts of journalists and other newsroom resources place limitations on

what issues and events can be covered.

All news organisations are accused of political bias. Questions are consistently raised

about the way different media models approach their coverage of a wide range of

political topics (see for instance Chapter 5 for discussion on News Limited’s

commercial and ideological imperatives). The veracity of the BBC’s commitment to

impartiality when reporting topic areas such as religion, immigration and European

politics is regularly criticised for “liberal and leftwing bias from politicians and other

sections of the media” (Halliday, 2012), which has led to regular reviews by the BBC

Trust of the news division’s performance. In fact the BBC Trust is currently

reviewing the newsroom’s approach to these topics for a report to be released in

2013.176 The report will compare the way the BBC currently deals with immigration

and religion topics compared with its coverage in 2007, when its adherence to

249

impartiality was last reviewed. It will also look at whether the BBC has ensured that

those who hold minority views are aware they can take part in on-air debates”

(Halliday, 2012). The 2007 report, From Seesaw to Wagon Wheel, found that while

there was no evidence of deliberate bias at the BBC, several executive level staff

members felt there was a level of “group think” in program-making areas that had

led to a “lack of intellectual curiosity”, a narrowed agenda, and reduced diversity of

opinion and ideas throughout BBC News services (Tait, 2007: 66).

While, as Halliday points out, “[r]ightwing sections of the media routinely lambast

the corporation over its alleged liberal bias” (Halliday, 2012), Mark Byford, then

BBC Deputy Director-General, took heed from a report that showed the audience

understands impartiality from a more intelligent perspective.177 He said the audience

“didn’t define it [impartiality] as balance. They didn’t define it as left/right. Although

they said it was complex, they also said it was about open-mindedness to ideas”

(Tait, 2007: 67). Given that the BBC’s first priority is to serve the public interest,

Byford was clearly more concerned with how the audience perceived the BBC’s

performance than the perceptions of media critics.

Journalism practice, values and ethics at the Guardian and News Limited are not

officially scrutinised to the extent that BBC journalism is, nor are they subjected to

the same kind of review processes. The fact that public broadcasters continue to be

rewarded with the highest level of public trust (Tillotson, 2010) can in part be

attributed to their strong commitment to impartiality and objectivity. Since the

regulatory process at the BBC is much more defined and rigorous than other

regulatory bodies such as the PCC, the BBC may be seen to be providing a more

balanced and reliable news service.

Without trust in journalism, there is genuine concern that “ignorance, misconceptions

and conspiracy theories will flourish” (Sambrook, 2004). In 2009, Todd Gitlin

warned that journalism would not regain trust until its failings were realised and

addressed (Gitlin, 2009: 7). Five years earlier, Sambrook had already begun to

identify such failings, observing a tendency for professional journalism to polarise

opinion by looking for people at the extremity of any argument, then putting those

people into the studio and letting them “go at each other”178 (Sambrook, 2004). The

250

problem with this approach is that the public knows the world is not black and white,

and as such they expect to see shades of grey. They also prefer unity over conflict

and they know “that argument on TV is often a sham and doesn't deal with the world

as they experience it” (Sambrook, 2004).

Independent 179 news media are positioned to challenge inaccurate and false

assertions made by traditional news media. They comprise a wide range of

interconnected eyewitness accounts, a diversity of viewpoints, are key sources of

information and many now connect with the traditional news media institutions,

which has a positive impact on the democratisation of journalism. Traditional news

media are positioned to partner with independent news organisations and to use Web

2.0 technologies (such as blogging, comment forums and hyperlinking) to provide

people with a greater depth of information and provide the means to allow them to

engage in their own verification process, thereby creating a more transparent news

environment.

The use of blogs provides news organisations with more space to tell a story and

additional ways to enable the public to follow it as it transpires. It also provides the

organisation with a way to explain/theorise its editorial decisions that may be

challenged either by individuals they report on or members of the public, thereby

providing greater transparency. Comment forums attached to blogs provide the

public with opportunities to add new perspectives, which also serves to provide

journalists with an additional method of fact checking.

The use of hyperlinks by journalists enables their editorial decisions to become more

transparent than publications that do not provide information about how they know,

and why the information is relevant to the public. Crowdsourced fact checking

enhances the contextualisation of the facts, which is beneficial for both the public

and journalists when evaluating information.

The use of blogs, comment forums, hyperlinks to additional information, and fact

checking initiatives180 by traditional news organisations, provides additional scope

for the basic facts to be further scrutinised, verified and contextualised through

deliberative discussion.

251

Conclusion

This chapter has shown the complexities of the impact of Web 2.0 technologies on

the politics of journalism in three different media models. It highlighted some of the

tangible differences between each model and identified those differences that are not

visible by simply looking at their websites. These include the effects of business and

value systems on professional practice, the allocation of space and resources to

deliberation, collaboration and participation, and the effects of the democratisation of

journalism on elements of journalism, including objectivity and impartiality. It has

shown how the collaboration between traditional news organisations, independent

news entities and the public can generate a more balanced, authentic and reliable

news sphere.

The next chapter will provide a clear explanation and analysis for the question of

how the three media models use Web 2.0 tools and technologies to provide the

public with new participatory and deliberative spaces. The discussion is framed

according to the four dimensions of theory building. Drawing on the previous

chapters, it restates the variables of each of the case studies in the context of the

conceptual definitions underpinning journalism. In doing so, it shows a range of

dynamics––political, economic and social––that connect the cases. It concludes by

highlighting some limitations of this research and suggesting future ways to research

this domain.

159 See (Holmes, 2012) for descriptive summary of events. 160 The Guardian’s open news list allows the public to talk to editors and reporters about upcoming stories as they work on them http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/series/open-newslist?INTCMP=SRCH 161 The authors cite the US and some European countries as an example. 162 For example, the closure of News Limited’s London and US Bureaus is described in Chapter 5. Also, Nick Davies provides analysis of cutbacks to foreign bureau in the US (Davies, 2009: 99). 163 While this statement was made in relation to a specific issue––the coup in Madagascar––Global Voices describes itself thus: “Global Voices seeks to aggregate, curate, and amplify the global conversation online – shining light on places and people other media often ignore. We work to develop tools, institutions and relationships that will help all voices, everywhere, to be heard” (Global Voices, 2012). 164 The Australian Press Council (APC) will be replaced by the News Media Council (NMC). 165 The public interest as defined by the PCC includes, but is not confined to: Detecting or exposing crime or serious impropriety; Protecting public health and safety; and Preventing the public from being misled by an action or statement of an individual or organisation. Adapted from the Press Complaints Commission: http://www.pcc.org.uk/cop/practice.html 166 A bottom-up approach draws from empirical evidence that describes the aims and objectives, and the values and principles that provide the framework for each case. It identifies the key journalistic features of each case, and it examines unique patterns of journalism practice. Conversely, a top-down approach would take a general view of each case based on common understandings of journalism.

252

167 Belam’s figures show that 2,600 users produce twenty per cent of the comments but comprise only 0.0037 per cent of the Guardian’s monthly audience. See Martin Belam’s Blog http://www.currybet.net/cbet_blog/2012/12/guardian-comments-part-1057.php 168 Sharia Law is the moral code and religious law of Islam. 169 See Send Us Your Stories http://www.theaustralian.com.au/help/send-stories 170 Jay Rosen defines Savviness as “that quality of being shrewd, practical, well-informed, perceptive, ironic, “with it,” and unsentimental in all things political—is, in a sense, their professional religion” (Rosen 2012) http://pressthink.org/2012/08/everything-thats-wrong-with-political-journalism-in-one-washington-post-item/. 171 See Dave Roberts for an explanation of how representations in the “Post-Truth” environment are embedded into discursive formations http://grist.org/article/2010-03-30-post-truth-politics/ 172 Bennett et al. also provide an account of the failure by the US press to satisfactorily apply the methods of objectivity in its coverage of intelligence reports describing the existence of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). 173 At the time of this interview Kelvin MacKenzie was an editor in the News International fold. He now works for The Daily Telegraph. 174 Richard Sambrook in Tillotson. 175 Original research includes interviews, eyewitness accounts and attendance at press conferences. 176 Report BBC Trust Review of Breadth of Opinion Reflected in the BBC’s Output, July 2013: http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/pdf/our_work/breadth_opinion/breadth_opinion.pdf 177 The Director General’s comments were made in relation to the report, Informing the Direction of BBC Impartiality for the Digital Age, February 5 2007, Sparkler: London. http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/pdf/review_report_research/impartiality_21century/b_qualitative_research.pdf 178 See comic writer Graham Linehan’s blog for an example of this practice from the perspective of an interviewee. Linehan blogs his disappointment in the BBC’s Radio Four Today program. He said the program producers invited him to speak about his adaption of the film Ladykillers for theatre but unbeknownst to him had also invited theatre critic Michael Billington to debate the relevance of Linehan’s adaption of the work to contemporary society. Linehan argues “the style of debate [squabbling] practiced by the Today programme poisons discourse.” Moreover, Linehan refers to the program as a “little fight club” (Linehan, 2011). Furthermore, this incident started a new debate, involving personal blogs, the BBC and social media, about the practice of this style of reporting. Links to the debate are listed in Linehan’s follow-up post where he provides detail about communication between himself and the program producers in the lead-up to the interview in question. 179 Hackett and Zhao (1998: 34) point out that independence of professional journalism from power does not always lead to objectivity and impartiality. This also applies to news entities, which are independent of traditional news organisations. 180 Examples of fact checking sites include the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) and the Conversation. While these site check facts, they do not perform the journalistic task of providing context to the facts.

253

Chapter 8 Conclusion

This thesis set out to discover the impact of the changes to journalism arising from

the professional and general use of Web 2.0 technologies during the period 1997–

2011 and whether the changes have contributed to a democratisation of journalism.

A comparative case study, which included a variety of some of the most significant

internationally acclaimed news media models, provided the basis for an in-depth

examination of how established public and commercial news providers, including the

BBC, the Guardian and the Australian, transitioned from traditional news platforms

to the online environment.

The research aimed to discover how each news model uses Internet communication

technologies to meet its journalistic objectives, and thereby continue to fulfil its role

as a member of the Fourth Estate. It also aimed to show the extent to which each

model of journalism has incorporated networked journalism, which is comprised of

technologies such as interactivity, collaboration and sharing, for the purpose of

creating spaces more conducive to participation and deliberation.

An extensive literature review was undertaken to provide the theoretical framework

from which to understand the practice of journalism and the evolving challenges for

its role in democratic society. The review was divided into two logical sections. The

first critically reviewed the crisis in journalism, and the civic elements of the

problem domain, including theories of journalism, particularly of the Fourth Estate,

deliberative democracy, the public sphere and citizenship. The second reviewed the

elements 181 that constitute the tools and technologies of journalism, including

network theory, network journalism, participation, crowdsourcing, user-generated

content, blogs and social media. These theoretical frameworks provided a foundation

from which to undertake the case study.

The research question posed in Chapter 1 sought to examine how the selected news

media models have migrated from traditional print and broadcast platforms to the

online news environment, to examine the extent to which each model uses

new/emerging participatory and deliberative spaces, and to reflect on the ways in

which the use of Web 2.0 technologies has affected the professional practice of

254

journalism. The comparative case study, which builds a relationship between each

case using the social, political and economic dynamics and variables that connect the

cases, was guided throughout by a set of criteria derived from the research question.

The outcomes of this research are briefly summarised against each criterion below.

Social, Economic and Political Objectives Frame Business Strategies

The business and value systems of each media model frame their social, economic

and political objectives, which directly affect how they approach their role as

members of the Fourth Estate. A review of the BBC’s mission statement as described

in the Royal Charter provided a foundation for understanding how and why its

business model is underpinned by an ongoing commitment to social responsibility

journalism. It explained that a licence fee paid by every household in the UK funds

BBC journalism, thereby establishing its obligation to ensure it satisfies the civic

needs of its audience. It has devised a number of strategies that enable it to fulfil its

obligation, one of which includes the creation of participatory and interactive

environments that are inclusive of a diverse demographic. In addition, it has

developed ways to ensure citizens have the skills to access these environments. The

study also emphasised the importance the BBC places on understanding how best to

build strong relationships with the audience and how to ensure that its journalists are

equipped with the skills and knowledge needed to practice journalism in the new

online environment.

All of the above demonstrates the BBC’s strong sense of civic duty. This research

has shown that BBC journalism’s commitment to its role in a democracy is framed

by the premise that the health of a liberal democracy is dependent upon an informed

and active citizenry. It is produced within a framework that conceptualises citizens as

political entities with rights to participate in the political process in the UK and

internationally, and therefore ought to have access and opportunities to interact with

accurate and balanced coverage of a wide range of social and political issues and

events and their subsequent debates. Drawing from the literature in Chapters 2 and 3,

the research illustrates the BBC’s understanding that conversations about public

policy ought to include as many participants as possible to ensure the deliberative

process takes account of competing interests. Furthermore, the BBC’s use of Web 2.0

technologies to provide individuals with the skills required to use interactive media

255

in multiple participatory environments (encompassing/hosting a diversity of public

spheres) shows it not only understands the importance of digital literacy but also

takes action to facilitate it.

The founding principles of the Guardian, like the BBC, interconnect with the

principles of the Fourth Estate. Its journalism aims to show people what is

happening, to stimulate public debate, and to enable people to share their experience

of the world with others, thereby providing them with a range of opportunities to

develop a better understanding of the world. Neither organisation is driven by the

need to generate revenue for profit. While the Guardian is primarily funded by the

Scott Trust, like News Limited, advertising revenue is a component of its business

model. However, the Guardian’s business model is unique because, while one of the

components is commercial dependency, this source of revenue is wholly used to

sustain its journalism. This means the Guardian’s editorial decisions, much like the

BBC’s, are free from market interference and therefore may be better able to consider

a greater range of viewpoints and produce news services with higher democratic

value182 than those organisations with major commercial dependencies.

A review of News Corporation’s News Digital Media showed the interconnected

relationship between the business and editorial components of News Limited. While

News Limited executives and editors say they place a high value on the

organisation’s production of quality journalism, its primary motivation for doing so

is to generate the kind of reputation that draws large niche audiences, which thereby

creates a healthy platform for advertisers and higher return for its shareholders. This

contrasts with the Guardian, which for more than ten years has embraced the

participatory practices of the new online environment as a way to interact and

collaborate with the public in a manner that enables it to fulfil its civic obligations.

News Limited’s late transition into the digital environment highlighted two key

problems for Australian citizens. First, commercial news organisations outside of

Australia were more motivated than News Limited to transition online because they

faced heavy competition from multiple competitors. Given the highly concentrated

circulation of News Corporation’s titles in Australia,183 News Limited had little

competition compared to The Times (London), for example, and therefore it could

comfortably continue to generate profits for its shareholders on the print platform.

256

News Limited transitioned its core editorial cohort online only when Rupert

Murdoch deemed it made good business sense, moreover when it began to face

competition from other online news media services such as the ABC, Fairfax Media,

Crikey, ninemsn and Yahoo!7. The second problem, a consequence of the first,

concerns the extent to which commercial interests impact on the democratic value184

of the dominant news service in Australia. Drawing from interviews with journalists,

the literature (Chapter 2 and 3), unobtrusive observation of News Corporation’s

website, publicly available transcripts of press conferences and the Rupert

Murdoch’s address to the American Society of Newspaper Editors in 2005, this

thesis has surmised that News Limited is primarily concerned with maximising

profits, at the expense of opening deliberative spaces for public debate, as the

Guardian and the BBC have done. Others further argue that the maximisation of

profits enables News Corporation to further increase and exploit its network of

power (Arsenault & Castells, 2008; Manne, 2011).

The examination of each traditional business model has shown how the new digital

environment has impacted on the ways in which each organisation approaches news

journalism. It explained how the new digital environment has forced commercial

news organisations to seek new ways to generate revenue to compensate for the loss

of income from declining classified and display advertising revenues. In doing so, it

has explained the benefits and challenges of News Limited’s subscription model to

its capacity to create a diversity of participatory, interactive, deliberative and

collaborative spaces where people can engage with and contribute ideas to matters of

public interest. It has also highlighted the Guardian’s resistance to the revenue

raising practices that limit any individual’s ability to contribute to the conversations

that shape the public debate, by opting for more participatory-directed business

strategies.

Transition Online Transforms Traditional News Media

Traditional news media models have transitioned from traditional platforms to online

news media environments for a variety of reasons. Initially, the BBC’s motivation for

its online transition was to draw audiences to its broadcast platform. It soon came to

realise the participatory and interactive benefits of Web 2.0 technologies to enhance

its connections with the public, and began to develop strategies to use these to better

257

fulfil its Charter obligations. The commitment of BBC News to participatory

strategies was illustrated by the reorganisation of its newsroom’s traditional

workflow to explicitly incorporate the interactive and networking components of the

online environment, including user-generated content, crowdsourcing, collaboration

and social media.

Some of the ways in which the BBC’s collaborative approach to newsgathering was

exemplified included a description and analysis of the crowdsourcing techniques it

used to investigate the misuse of MP expenses, and a descriptive analysis of how it

incorporates user-generated content into its own journalism to better reflect what is

happening to individuals in diverse and dispersed locations. This illustrated how the

BBC uses Web 2.0 technologies to monitor power. The study also showed the BBC’s

provision of multiple entry points to public debates to ensure equality of access for

its diverse social demographic. It showed that these entry points extend beyond the

walls of the BBC to include multiple social media platforms.

The Guardian’s online transition was initially a response to the cultural shift of

audiences to the digital environment. As it began to incorporate the use of Web 2.0

technologies into its journalism it saw a number of possibilities to better engage

readers in dialogue with its journalists and other members of the public, thereby

increasing its civic value. The Guardian case study shows how its digital mindset

evolved to the extent that it expressed a desire to become of the Web rather than

simply on the Web (Bell, 2011). This involved opening its journalism to the world,

asking the public to help it investigate important issues (British MP expenses),

collaborating with new sources of information (WikiLeaks), sharing information with

other international news providers, interacting with the public on a variety of issues

using a range of Web 2.0 tools and technologies (for example blogs, comment

forums, hyperlinks and social media), opening its news agenda to the public for

suggestions, and the use of user-generated content and a much wider range of

freelance opinion writers than that of many other news organisations, which serves to

better reflect the diversity of lifestyle and culture of the world. Each tool and

technology of the Web is used to open the Guardian’s editorial framework to the

world, to enhance its accountability, transparency and trust, thereby enriching its

civic purpose and value.

258

Chapter 5 has shown that News Limited aims to produce professional journalism

based on traditional journalistic values to ensure it maintains a dominant position in

the news industry and continues to be attractive to commercial clients. It promotes

itself as “one of Australia’s leading online publishers” and has been described by

outsiders as Australia’s “most important newspaper” (Manne, 2011). As such, it

continually explores innovative ways of developing content that engages readers and

most importantly “offers new opportunities for our clients to build their brands

online” (Bass et al., 2010): 26. The publication’s readership is largely comprised of

the political and business elite (Mathieson, 2009) and politically engaged citizens. As

such, whether the political class loves or loathes the publication, they will not

disregard it (Manne, 2011) and that particular demographic has shown a willingness

to pay for it.

The study showed that News Limited has successfully integrated its online platform

with the print edition in ways that are inclusive of the public, albeit much later and to

a lesser extent than the BBC and Guardian. Chapter 5 described and analysed News

Limited’s transition from print to the online environment and focused on the benefits

and challenges to the organisation’s approach to journalism. In particular, it showed

that while its journalists have generally embraced Internet technologies for their

capacity to create more interactive connections with the public, the mission of the

organisation is more concerned with keeping the readership within the confines its

own environment where it has more control over the message, and can better provide

advertisers with the niche audiences they demand. Like the BBC and Guardian, the

online environment, particularly the blog format, provides News Limited journalists

with more space to explain complex issues, and comment forums provide them with

supplementary information, and at times serve as a research tool.

A point of difference between each of the media models studied here, however, is

that News Limited publications rarely use outbound hyperlinks, which are described

in Chapters 3, 4 and 6 as an effective way to provide readers with extra information

and a greater diversity of viewpoints, thereby enhancing readers’ knowledge and

understanding of perhaps complex matters.

259

The study positioned News Limited within a global media conglomeration, which

spans three continents, however it also showed that each of its publications aim to

serve a local rather than international audience. As such, News Limited places more

emphasis on national rather than international priorities in its news coverage to

enable the development of niche audiences, which can then be targeted by a stable of

advertisers from within their particular locale.

Web 2.0 Technologies Better Enable the Fourth Estate

A consequence of the cultural shift caused by the new information economy is the

transformation of traditional media business models to include participatory

strategies, to differing degrees, which as a result will necessarily move them from a

profit oriented focus to a more public service oriented one.

The research has shown the similarities and differences between the ways in which

each media model uses Web 2.0 technologies to enact the principles of the Fourth

Estate, which includes the creation of a variety of spaces/forums where the public is

exposed to a diversity of viewpoints formed independent of government and

commercial interests, where they are free to engage in deliberative dialogue about

public affairs. It showed the many and often innovative ways in which each case of

study has approached the development and use of the new tools and technologies of

journalism, derived from Web 2.0. Journalism practice in each case has evolved at

different rates and to different degrees to become more participatory, interactive,

collaborative and networked. As such, the use of various Web 2.0 technologies by

news media has seen journalism become more open and more inclusive of public

opinion and more transparent, especially in the organisations whose remit is

primarily concerned with the provision of news services based on civic/democratic

values.

Where only a small percentage of the public could ever participate in the limited

print and broadcast spaces available to the public in the past, the use of blogs and

their associated comment forums (BBC, Guardian and News Limited), message

boards (BBC), citizen content pages (Guardian: Comment is Free), the inclusion of

editorialised citizen generated content (images, video and audio) on a variety of news

platforms (BBC, Guardian and News Limited, but excluding the Australian), and

260

social media platforms such as Facebook (BBC, the Guardian), Twitter (BBC,

Guardian and News Limited), and YouTube channels (BBC and the Guardian) has

enabled greater opportunity for individual participation.

Chapter 2 established the importance for news organisations to provide the public

with a range of entry points into the public debate. It described two dimensions of

participation, individual participation where the public engages in the deliberative

process (illustrated in Chapter 7), and collective intelligence, which involves citizens

contributing to crowdsourcing initiatives such as the Guardian and BBC’s MP

expenses projects. Each of these draws on the crowd’s knowledge and analytical

skills to solve complex problems. Chapter 2 showed that one of the main concerns

about democratic theory regards the levels of participation in public policy debates

and the freedom to participate. The use of Web 2.0 tools (blogs and so on) and

technologies (crowdsourcing) by each of the media models studied here have

enabled more interactivity between journalists and citizens, and provided more scope

for the further development of new tools and technologies that enable journalists to

provide greater depth and identify the finer peculiarities of complex issues (Chapters

4 and 6), thereby creating a greater capacity for news media to reflect public life and

the lives of the public than was possible using only print and broadcast technologies.

Changing media technologies and social attitudes have driven the demand for

increased interaction between journalists and the public. One of the consequences of

these changes has been a cultural shift in the way that people view the fundamental

authoritativeness once held by traditional news producers. The ease with which the

public can now create and share content on any topic, from any location, using a

range of digital devices, means the public has now come to expect interactive news

services in which they can see more of themselves reflected. In keeping with the

BBC’s mission to “help deliver to the public the benefit of emerging communications

technologies and services, and to sustain citizenship and civil society” (2010a), its

newsroom welcomes the increased public interaction opportunities offered by new

media technologies, whether via emails, photos, Facebook ‘likes’, blog comments,

and so on, and aims to form more “two-way relationships” (British Broadcasting

Corporation, 2007c: 6) with the public. In doing so, it believes that this will

261

strengthen its position as an authoritative service, derived from its long held

commitment to its stated journalistic principles.

While the tools of journalism have changed, the technologies of journalism, which at

their most basic is about talking to people to discover what matters to them, have not,

nor have the professional ethics and values of journalism (Eltringham, 2008). The

BBC study has shown that while BBC News takes care to listen to the interests of the

public, it also asserts an appropriate level of editorial control to ensure it serves the

purposes set out by the BBC Royal Charter and meets the aims of BBC news

journalism (as shown in Chapter 4). It has also shown how the newsroom uses

Internet technologies to take greater measures to be more transparent, thereby

engendering greater trust with those it aims to serve.

The study also described the technologies of journalism utilised by the BBC to

generate conversations with the public. It showed how the methods of interactivity

constantly evolve with the array of issues and events that pass through the BBC

newsroom. From message boards and blogs, to the changing processes of comment

moderation and linking policies, the BBC consistently takes a proactive approach to

engaging the community with the issues in ways that cater to a diversity of social and

political interests. The study also identified and analysed the BBC’s methods of

creating deliberative spaces for social and political expression. It described the new

found capacities for journalists to bring questions delivered by individual audience

members directly into the newsroom using a range of devices such as webcam, SMS

text and email messages. These are presented directly to authority figures, in front of

live television and radio broadcasts, or streamed online. This study has shown that

the innovative use of Internet technologies by BBC News iteratively fashions cultural

and political changes from the news as a lecture toward the democratisation of

journalism.

The study of the Guardian described the ways in which its newsroom develops and

uses the tools and technologies of journalism. The section included a thick

description of the ways in which journalist Kevin Anderson incorporates the use of

Web 2.0 technologies with his traditional journalism practices to increase

interactivity between himself and the public for mutual benefit. Anderson’s

262

framework for interactivity is representative of journalism practice at the Guardian

and complies with the expectations of Fourth Estate theories.

The study of News Limited described and analysed the way journalist bloggers at the

Australian and the Herald Sun use news blogs. In particular, Andrew Bolt and

George Megalogenis, both originally print journalists, explained the value of the

digital platform to their practice and more broadly to democracy. The study also

described and analysed the use of social media technologies by News Limited

journalists. It showed that while many News Limited journalists have embraced

social media as a way of increasing interactivity with the public, others are satisfied

with limiting their interactivity to their own blog platforms, which means they do not

engage with social media platforms such as Twitter or Facebook.

Web 2.0 Technologies Challenge and Benefit the Politics of Journalism

The big issues that comprise the politics of journalism are concerned with the

business model, the capacity for journalism to fulfil its role as the Fourth Estate, and

the impact of the participatory model on its traditional ideals. The research analysed

some of the tangible differences between each model, including the effects of

business and value systems on professional practice, the effects of the economic

crisis on journalism’s ability to report the world beyond what is happening in

people’s immediate locale, the allocation of space and resources to deliberation,

collaboration and participation, and the effects of the democratisation of journalism

on elements of journalism, including objectivity and impartiality.

The News Limited study highlighted concerns about the unequal distribution of

power than ensues in countries with concentrated ownership of news media, such as

Australia. It presented existing arguments that this kind of power may not serve the

best interests of the public. It also described the concerns underpinning theoretical

debates about the ability of commercial news organisations to balance their

obligations to their business stakeholders with their social responsibility to the

citizenry.

The research also discussed how the collaboration between traditional news

organisations and independent journalism entities such as WikiLeaks, Ushahidi,

263

Demotix and Storyful generates a more balanced, authentic and reliable news sphere.

Each of the independent organisations are curating and making sense of large

volumes of data produced by ordinary citizens from all over the world that would not

usually be accessible using traditional methods of journalism. These organisations

serve a number of purposes, as news gatherers, to identify disparate voices, and to

provide the necessary checks and balances for mainstream news media. In this way

they can be seen to alleviate some of the problems associated with objectivity and

impartiality. Collaboration between traditional and independent news media entities

provides an even broader range of voices and perspectives than traditional media can

provide on its own.

Limitations

A limitation of this research is that a sample of media organisations is not

exhaustive. It also confines the study mainly to Australian and UK news industries.

There are many different models of public service and commercial news media. As

such, this research does not seek to present a generalised view of “public service

media”, for example, based on one case. Rather it seeks to show the varied ways in

which particular journalists use Web 2.0 technologies and how such uses impact on

the each model’s approach to its role as a member of the Fourth Estate.

Similarly, the research did not use an exhaustive sample of journalists; instead it

sought out those who were early adopters of Web 2.0 tools and technologies in each

organisation.

Ideally, future research on this topic would include a wider range of journalists,

editors and organisations to provide a more representative sample, and therefore

build on the findings of this thesis.

Future Research

The findings of this research suggest a number of areas for future investigation. The

first area concerns how participatory environments may be used to generate the

revenue required to sustain journalism and, in the case of commercial organisations,

to satisfy shareholders.

264

The research raises questions about the usefulness of comments forums as

deliberative spaces. The example discussed in Chapter 7, regarding the assassination

of Benazir Bhutto, illustrates that the conversations in these forums are not

necessarily representative of the wider audience and may not be deliberative. Given

that some organisations are moving toward more restrictive models, while

simultaneously retaining their commitment to participatory strategies, a useful

research topic might investigate which models produce the most effective

conversations.

Future research might also build on this research by applying the same research

methodology to extend the comparative analysis to include Australian news entities

such as the Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s (ABC), Sky News, Fairfax,

ninemsn and Crikey with the view of providing a deeper comparison with the cases

studied here.

The research could be further enhanced by interleaving it with Stephen Cushion’s

(2012) research that sought to discover the democratic value of the news provided by

a variety of media models.

The gatekeeping mindset characteristic of all traditional news media is slowly

eroding as journalism evolves to become more participatory, collaborative and

networked. The ongoing challenge for news media is to ensure it can maximise the

benefits arising from Web 2.0 technologies in ways that enable it to continue to fulfil

its role as the Fourth Estate. Each of the cases studied in this research exhibit unique

qualities that have to varying degrees contributed to a democratisation of journalism.

265

Appendix A: Research Interviewees

Interviewee

Organization

Title

Interview Type

1

James Taranto

Wall Street Journal

Editor Opinion Journal Member of WSJ Editorial Board.

Face-to face

2 Kevin Anderson Guardian/BBC Guardian Blogs Editor

Face-to face

3 Richard Sambrook BBC Director of Global News.

Face-to face

4 Vicky Taylor BBC Editor, Interactivity.

Face-to face

5 Matthew Eltringham BBC Assistant Editor, Interactivity and Social Media Development at BBC News.

Face-to face

6 Jean K. Min OhmyNews Communications Director.

Face-to face

7 Peter Wilson

Australian Foreign Correspondent London Bureau

Face-to face

8 Peter Alford Australian Foreign Correspondent Tokyo Bureau

Face-to face

9 Andrew Bolt Herald Sun Senior Journalist

Telephone

10 Clive Mathieson Australian Deputy Editor

Telephone

11 George Megalogenis

Australian Senior Journalist

Telephone

266

Appendix B: The BBC Royal Charter

The Charter describes the public purpose of the BBC in six distinct fields:

1. To sustain citizenship and civil society;

2. To stimulate creativity and cultural excellence;

3. To promote education and learning;

4. To represent the UK, its nations, regions and communities;

5. Global: To bring the UK to the world and the world to the UK; and

6. Digital: To promote its other purposes including:

o To help to deliver to the public the benefit of emerging

communications technologies and services; and

o To take a leading role in the switchover to digital television (British

Broadcasting Corporation, 2006, 2010a) (Department for Culture

Media and Sport, 2006: 3).

267

Appendix C: BBC Floor Plan

268

Appendix D: Nick Robinson Newslog

269

Appendix E: The Australian’s Story Tip Page

270

Appendix F: Independent News Entities

This Appendix describes three independent news entities, Storyful, Ushahidi and

Demotix, each a product of Web 2.0 technologies that curate, crowdsource and

corroborate content for collaboration with traditional news media. Each organisation

is seen to complement the traditional news sphere.

Storyful

“Storyful uses the power of social networks to create an authentic,

cooperative and socially useful journalism” (Little, 2011).

Founded by journalist Mark Little in 2010, Storyful is an online curatorial service

with two dimensions. First, it provides a story-building tool for anyone who wants to

create and share a story with others, and secondly it describes itself as a tool-kit for

newsrooms working to incorporate social media into their newsgathering. Storyful

acts “as a social media ‘field producer’” that alerts news organisations to breaking

stories and connects them with field operatives such as “freelance journalists,

activists, talented amateurs, aid workers” and ordinary citizens. It uses a range of

social Web technologies to monitor and curate the many conversations on the Web

about the news of the world as it happens. It identifies, verifies, and monitors the

global, national and local news issues and events that matter to citizens all over the

world. It then seeks to locate authentic authorities and content which shape the

narratives that inform audiences about what is happening.

The idea for this service evolved from Little’s desire to produce a new kind of

journalism, one that is based on discovery, participation, interactivity and

collaboration. It aims to form partnerships with traditional news media brands,

professional and citizen journalists and other informants. One of its key objectives is

to provide curation tools that enable anyone to generate and distribute original news

content online. Storyful is used to both extract and post raw content from and to

multiple social media and blog platforms. The organisation provides services for

“major global news organisations” (Little, 2011) whereby it passes on specific

journalistically treated content for many of the breaking news stories.

271

Any individual or organisation can monitor Storyful for breaking news, however

those wishing to be supplied with content for repackaging are required to enter into a

business transaction with it. As previously discussed, one of the greatest concerns for

many traditional news organisations using social media is about filtering and

authenticating the continually large volumes of content being produced by

individuals with different agendas and levels of media production literacy. 185

Organisations such as Reuters purchase content from Storyful that has undergone

rigorous professional journalism treatment, which saves it using its own newsroom

resources to perform those tasks.

The interesting aspect of Storyful is that it sources a much broader range of news and

information than that which is covered by traditional news media. It carries both

firsthand accounts of people who are on the scene of breaking news and events and

curated content generated by professional and citizen curators throughout the world.

For example, as Typhoon Roke threatened Tokyo, professional curator Aine Kerr,

based in Ireland, curated content about the typhoon from NASA, Twitter, various

Airlines, YouTube, Japan’s meteorological agency and Tokyo reporters, to provide

both official and citizen information about the event. Kerr’s report showed a satellite

picture of the typhoon, linked to flood hazard maps, alerted people to the threat of

breaking dams, floods and landslides, and used a range of citizen produced still and

video images to show the intensity of the weather, and its impact on human life,

motorways and infrastructure such as public transport. Following concerns that the

Fukushima nuclear plant may have been disturbed by the typhoon, Kerr was able to

investigate and report that it had been unaffected (Kerr, 2011). The Storyful website

contains a number of case studies186 that exemplify the kind of work it undertakes.

For instance, it claims to have verified and published almost three thousand files

related to the Syrian political movement over a period of four months during 2011

and its footage has been used by traditional news media globally more than 14,000

times (Storyful, 2010).

Storyful uses a blog to inform the public of the latest news and events at Storyful and

to crowdsource content about particular events. For example, it used the blog to ask

the public to create and curate content about the 2011 Royal Wedding between

Prince William and Kate Middleton (Nolan, 2011). The blog is also used to post tips

272

and information recommending useful tools that can be used to gather and create

content and data visualisations. Storyful aims to provide information about the tools

and technologies of journalism for journalists, journalism technology programmers

and journalism students (Sheridan, 2012).

Demotix

Demotix is a freelance photography agency launched in 2009. It crowdsources

photographic content from ordinary citizens worldwide. Demotix contributors

produce pictures of everyday life that would not normally be obtained by traditional

news media. The organisation aims to maximise the benefits arising from the use of

digital technologies by the general population, to capture newsworthy events and

everyday life, and to bring it to the world. It also aims to fill the gaps left by the

cutbacks to traditional newsroom resources.

Demotix was acquired by Corbis Corporation in 2012. Corbis was founded in 1989,

and is wholly owned, by Bill Gates. It licences the rights to its collection of 100

million visual media images to advertising, marketing and media organisations

(Corbis Corporation, 2012).

Demotix acts as a broker between news organisations and its contributors, with a

business model based on the idea that people would prefer to be remunerated for

their content instead of supplying it to news organisations for free. With a

community of 30,000 users and 4,750 active photo and video journalists it aims to

sell licences to use crowdsourced content to established media organisations

including the Guardian, the BBC, the New York Times, Wall Street Journal and

others (Demotix, 2011). Demotix guarantees that contributors will retain copyright of

the content they contribute however the remuneration is split equally between

Demotix and the contributor.

Since its acquisition by Corbis Corporation, Corbis also has access to the Demotix

image library, which means it too can attempt to sell content to its own clients.

Where that occurs, Corbis attracts a small fee and passes the remaining fee to

Demotix who splits the fee equally with the contributor. Demotix uses Facebook,

Twitter and its own blog to connect with the public and to crowdsource content. In

273

April 2012 Storyful joined forces with Demotix in an initiative that aimed to create a

unique real-time newswire.

Ushahidi

Ushahidi187 is a non-profit technology company that develops open source software

for the collection of information, the visualisation of data, and interactive mapping

(Ushahidi, 2008) of crises as they happen anywhere in the world. It states its aims as

being to “build tools for democratizing information, increasing transparency and

lowering the barriers for individuals to share their stories” (Ushahidi, 2008).

Since its beginnings in 2008, Ushahidi has grown to become a large organisation,

with developers based in Africa, Europe, South America and the US. The

organisation began as a group of volunteers who mapped reports of peace efforts and

violence arising in Kenya following the 2008 elections (Conde, 2010; Ushahidi,

2008). It has since been used to map and monitor unrest in the Congo, to track

violence in Gaza, to monitor the 2009 Indian election, to gather reports about Swine

Flu outbreaks throughout the world and to map the BP oil spill (Ushahidi, 2012b).

The product has also been used worldwide by those wanting to display real time

visualisations of “pro-democracy protests and the government crackdowns” (Meier,

2011). This method of crisis mapping, described by Meier as “new type of

geography” (Meier, 2011), is interactive, and “provides immediate situational

awareness” (Meier, 2011).

Information, including user-generated content, is received via a range of Internet and

digital technologies and then visualised on a map. Meier contends the information

gathered and produced by multiple participants at the scene of events helps to

“synchronise shared awareness” of social movements (Meier, 2011) and other

important issues such as incidents of genocide in South Africa, sexual violence

against women in Syria and more general information, such as mobile Internet

connection in Brazil (Ushahidi, 2012a). Moreover, the software enables anyone to

curate, map and triangulate information produced by anyone anywhere in the world,

to show an easily verifiable map of events and issues. The technology has proven to

be useful for professional journalists covering news in areas that are hard to access.

Maria Conde contends it “has a lot to offer to journalists and the information

274

gathered by both journalists and average citizens… complement each other” (Conde,

2010). Furthermore, she says it has the capacity to compensate for the information

flows lost following the closure of many foreign news bureaus.

Summary

Storyful generates revenue by providing consultancies and curatorial services to other

news organisations. It provides its contributors with editorial advice freely available

on its website, which indicates that it too has recognised and adopted a participatory

business strategy. Similarly, Ushahidi’s website provides free advice about how to

use its platform and software, and provides tutorials on how to verify content and

monitor elections. While Demotix is now owned by Corbis, it was initially funded by

advertising and consultancies. It too is modelled on participatory strategies.

181 These are also variables since their value and application differs in each media model. 182 Democratic value is defined here as “news [that] conveys information likely to enhance people’s understanding of the world on issues likely to empower them as citizens in a democracy (Cushion, 2012: 204). This includes international, investigative and local news that is produced in line with the values of verification, objectivity, impartiality and transparency. 183 Flew reports, “Newspaper sales per 100 Australians were 9.7 in 2011, as compared to 21.9 in 1987 and 13.0 in 2000” (Flew, 2013). 184 Cushion refers to “the democratic value of news” (Cushion, 2012). The phrase is used here to describe information that increases people’s knowledge and understanding of the world and of matters that affect the way they go about their daily lives. It incorporates activities such as interactive participation, deliberation and collaboration. 185 A comprehensive explanation of Storyful’s verification process is provided by Malachy Browne on its Website (Browne, 2012). 186 See Storyful Case Studies http://storyful.com/case-studies/case-study-ongoing-syria-coverage 187 Ushahidi is a Swahili word, which means “testimony or witness” (Ushahidi, 2012b).

275

References Adams, A. (2011, September 9). How has social media changed the way newsrooms

work? BBC Journalism and Social Media. Presentation. Retrieved September 9, 2011, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2011/09/ibc_in_amsterdam.html

Adams, D. (2006, 25–26 September). Journalism, citizens and blogging. Paper presented at the Communications Policy and Research Forum, Sydney.

Ahlers, D., & Hessen, J. (2005). Traditional media in the digital age. Nieman Reports, 59(3), 65–68.

Alford, P. (2008, April 21). [Personal Communication]. Allan, S. (2006). Online news: Journalism and the Internet. Maidenhead: Open

University Press. Anderson, B. (1983). Cultural roots. Imagined communities: Reflections on the

origin and spread of nationalism (pp. 17–40). London: Verso. Anderson, C. (2011, May 18). Linking and journalism: The workflow issue. Strange

Attractor. Blog Comment. Retrieved June 2, 2011, from http://charman-anderson.com/2011/05/18/linking-and-journalism-the-workflow-issue/

Anderson, C., Bell, E., & Shirky, C. (2012). Post-industrial journalism: Adapting to the present. New York: Columbia Journalism School.

Anderson, K. (2008, April 7). [Personal Communication]. Anderson, K. (2009, May 20). Kevin Anderson on the bus: US08 election campaign,

mobile and Internet technologies. Paper presented at the Media140 London. Anderson, K. (2011, May 18). Linking and journalism: The workflow issue. Strange

Attractor. Blog Post. Retrieved June 2, 2011, from http://charman-anderson.com/2011/05/18/linking-and-journalism-the-workflow-issue/

Andrés, L, Cuberes, D, Diouf, M., & Serebrisky, T. (2007). Diffusion of the Internet: A cross-country analysis. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

Arsenault, A., & Castells, M. (2008). Switching power: Rupert Murdoch and the global business of media politics. International Sociology, 23(4), 488–513.

Athey, S., & Mobius, M. (2012). The impact of news aggregators on Internet news consumption: The case of localization (Working paper ed.).

Atton, C., & Hamilton, J. (2008a). Alternative journalism. London Sage. Atton, C., & Hamilton, J. (2008b). Why alternative journalism matters. The Reader

(Vol. 31, pp. 1–15). Australian Broadcasting Corporation. (2006, March 9). Chris Mitchell of the

Australian. The Media Report. Retrieved October 6, 2009, from http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/mediareport-1999/chris-mitchell-of-the-australian/3305444

Australian Broadcasting Corporation. (2013). Panelist: Andrew Bolt. Retrieved June 25, 2013, from http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s2521053.htm

Australian Press Council. (2011). A charter for a free press in Australia. Australian Press Council Policy. Retrieved January 10, 2013, from http://www.presscouncil.org.au/charter-of-press-freedom/

Bahnisch, M. (2005). Political blogs versus big media? It's the wrong question to ask. On Line Opinion. Retrieved April 5, 2009, from http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=3376

Bailey, D. (2009, July 15). Got a comment? Keep it to yourself. boston.com. Retrieved February 1, 2010, from

276

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2009/07/15/got_a_comment_keep_it_to_yourself/

Baker, J. (2013, February 11). BBC journalism fellowships 2013/14 are now open for applications. BBC College of Journalism. Retrieved February 12, 2013, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/blogcollegeofjournalism/posts/14-are-now-open-for-applications

Bakhurst, K. (2011, September 9). How has social media changed the way newsrooms work? BBC News. Retrieved October 6, 2011, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2011/09/ibc_in_amsterdam.html

Balinska, M. (2010). A former BBC producer takes a fresh look at foreign news: 'It's the audience, stupid'. Nieman Reports, Fall.

Balkin, J. (2006). Mediating the social contradiction of the digital age. Paper presented at the The Wealth of Networks Seminar, Online http://crookedtimber.org/2006/05/30/mediating-the-social-contradiction-of-the-digital-age/

Bardoel, J., & Deuze, M. (2001). Networked journalism: Converging competencies of old and new media professionals. Australian Journalism Review, 23(2), 91–103.

Barnett, S., Seymour, E., & Gaber, I. (2000). From Callaghan to Kosovo: Changing trends in British television news 1975–1999. London: University of Westminster.

Bartlett, P. (2012, November 21). View from Australia, media regulation: Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Inforrm's Blog. Retrieved November 30, 201, from http://inforrm.wordpress.com/2012/11/21/view-from-australia-media-regulation-damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-dont-peter-bartlett/

Bass, D., Smith, J., & Samin, A. (2010). News Digital Media: Digital insight report News Digital Media (Vol. June). Sydney.

Baumer, E., Sueyoshi, M., & Tomlinson, B. (2008). Exploring the role of the reader in the activity of blogging. Paper presented at the 2008 ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Florence.

Beckett, C. (2008a). Supermedia: Saving journalism so it can save the world. Malden, MA: Wiley.

Beckett, C. (2008b). SuperMedia: The future as 'Networked Journalism'. Retrieved December 20, 2008, from http://www.opendemocracy.net/article/supermedia-the-networked-journalism-future

Beckett, C. (2009, September 7). State 2.0: A new front end? Open Democracy: Free Thinking for the World. Retrieved September 8, 2009, from http://www.opendemocracy.net/article/state-2-0-a-new-front-end

Beckett, C. (2010, June 11). The value of networked journalism. Paper presented at the Value of Networked Journalism Conference, London.

Beckett, C. (2012, August 15). WikiLeaks and network-era news. OpenDemocracy. Retrieved August 20, 2012, from http://www.opendemocracy.net/charlie-beckett/wikileaks-and-network-era-news

Beckett, C. (2013, August 22). From fee to mutual? What kind of BBC do you want to emerge from Charter renewal? Retrieved August 22, 2013, from http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/polis/2013/08/22/from-fee-to-mutual-what-kind-of-bbc-do-you-want-to-emerge-from-charter-renewal/

Beckett, C., & Ball, J. (2012). WikiLeaks: News in the networked era. London: Polity Press.

277

Belam, M. (2011). Help me finish my talk on digital content strategy in a print business. currybetdotnet. Retrieved August 30, 2011, from http://www.currybet.net/cbet_blog/2011/08/martin-belam-content-strategy.php

Belam, M., & Martin, P. (2011, January 12). Tags are magic! Part 1. guardian.co.uk. Retrieved May 1, 2011, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/info/developer-blog/2011/jan/10/tags-are-magic-1

Bell, E. (Producer). (2011, March 3). The state of journalism in today's digital world. Samara/Massey Journalism Seminar. [Lecture] Retrieved from http://cpac.ca/forms/index.asp?dsp=template&act=view3&pagetype=vod&hl=e&clipID=5216

Bender, J., Davenport, L., Drager, M., & Fedler, F. (2009). Reporting for the media (9th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

Benhabib, S. (2006). Democracy and difference: Reflections on the metapolitics of Lyotard and Derrida. In L. Thomassen (Ed.), The Derrida-Habermas Reader (pp. 128–156). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Benkler, Y. (2006). The wealth of networks: How social production transforms markets and freedom. In Y. Benkler (Ed.), Wealth of Networks (pp. 1–26). New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press.

Bennett, D. (2011). The impact of blogging on the BBC's coverage of war and terrorism. (Doctor of Philosophy Thesis), King's College, London.

Bennett, W. (2007, March 5-6). Changing citizenship in the digital age. Paper presented at the OECD/INDIRE Conference on Millenial Learners, Florence.

Bennett, W., Lawrence, R., & Livingston, S. (2007). When the press fails: Political power and the news media from Iraq to Katrina. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Bentley, C. (2008, June 20–21). Citizen journalism: Back to the future. Paper presented at the The Carnegie-Knight Conference on the Future of Journalism, Cambridge, MA.

Benton, J. (2011, April 6). More data on The Daily: What's prime time for iPad use? And which stories get tweeted the most? Retrieved April 10, 2011, from http://www.niemanlab.org/2011/04/more-data-on-the-daily-whats-prime-time-for-ipad-use-and-which-stories-get-tweeted-the-most/

Boaden, H. (2008, November 13). The role of citizen journalism in modern democracy. The Editors. Retrieved November 15, 2008, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2008/11/the_role_of_citizen_journalism.html

Bollinger, l. (2010). Uninhibited robust and wide open free press for a new century [Lecture]. London: London School of Economics.

Bolt, A. (2006, August 24). The big hole in that ambulance story. Herald Sun. Online. Retrieved April 2, 2009, from http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/the_big_hole_in_that_ambulance_story/

Bolt, A. (2009, February 20). [Personal Communication]. Born, G. (2004). Uncertain vision: Birt, Dyke and the reinvention of the BBC.

London: Vintage. Born, G. (2006). Digitising democracy. In J. Lloyd & J. Seaton (Eds.), What can be

done? Making the media and politics better (pp. 102–123). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing In Association With The Political Quarterly.

278

Born, G. (2012). Mediating the public sphere: Digitization, pluralism, and communicative democracy. In C. Emden & D. Midgley (Eds.), Beyond Habermas: Democracy, knowledge, and the public sphere. Oxford: Berghahn Books.

Brabham, D. (2008). Crowdsourcing as a model for problem solving. The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 14(1), 75–90.

Bradshaw, P. (2010a). Blogging journalists: The writing on the wall. Eastbourne: Sussex Academic Press.

Bradshaw, P. (2010b, January 15). What is user generated content? Online Journalism Blog. Retrieved January 20, 2010, from http://onlinejournalismblog.com/2010/01/15/what-is-user-generated-content/

Brandenburg, H. (2006). Pathologies of the virtual public sphere. In S. Oates, D. Owen & R. Gibson (Eds.), The Internet and politics: Citizens, voters and activists (pp. 207–222). London: Routledge.

Briggs, M. (2007). Journalism 2.0: How to survive and thrive J. Schaffer (Ed.) Retrieved from http://www.kcnn.org/resources/journalism_20/

British Broadcasting Corporation. (2001). BBCi heralds new interactive era. Entertainment: New Media. Retrieved June 15, 2007, from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/1643259.stm

British Broadcasting Corporation. (2004). The BBC's contribution to informed citizenship: Submission to the independent panel on charter review (pp. 1–72). London: BBC.

British Broadcasting Corporation. (2006). Governance framework: The Charter. BBC Trust. Retrieved January 26, 2010, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/about/how_we_govern/charter_and_agreement/index.shtml

British Broadcasting Corporation. (2007a). BBC Public Purpose Remit: Sustaining Citizenship and Civil Society BBC Trust (Vol. December): BBC.

British Broadcasting Corporation. (2007b). BBC's global website to carry ads. Retrieved October 18, 2007, from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7050625.stm

British Broadcasting Corporation. (2007c, 2009). Public purpose remit. BBC Trust. 2. Retrieved January 26, 2009, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/about/how_we_govern/purpose_remits/

British Broadcasting Corporation. (2008a, October 8). About this blog. BBC News See Also: A collection of the best of the Web. Retrieved October 26, 2008, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/seealso/2008/10/

British Broadcasting Corporation. (2008b). Service review: bbc.co.uk BBC Trust. London: BBC Trust.

British Broadcasting Corporation. (2010a, May). BBC protocol: A1- BBC public purposes. BBC Protocol. Retrieved June 2, 2010, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/about/how_we_govern/protocols_policy/public_purposes.shtml

British Broadcasting Corporation. (2010b, March). BBC strategy review. BBC Trust. Retrieved June 2, 2010, from http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/insidethebbc/howwework/reports/pdf/strategy_review.pdf

279

British Broadcasting Corporation. (2010c). Live coverage: General eection 2010. Election 2010. Retrieved May 23, 2011, from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/election2010/liveevent/

British Broadcasting Corporation. (2010d). Policies and guidelines: Advertising. Retrieved June 2, 2010, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/policies/advertising.shtml

British Broadcasting Corporation. (2010e). Putting quality first. Strategy Review. Retrieved February 26, 2010, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/future/strategy_review.shtml

British Broadcasting Corporation. (2010f). What's changing on the BBC website? Retrieved December 7, 2010, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbc.com/faq/

British Broadcasting Corporation (Producer). (2011a, May 23). BBC social media summit: Alan Rusbridger. Digital Discussion and Closing. [Video] Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/journalism/blog/2011/05/bbcsms-what-next.shtml

British Broadcasting Corporation (Producer). (2011b, May 21). Cultural changes: Meg Pickard. BBC Social Media Summit. [Video] Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6YoZOyVfkU&feature=related

British Broadcasting Corporation. (2011c, November 11). See Also is closing down. BBC News. Retrieved April 3, 2012, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/seealso/2011/11/see_also_is_closing_down.html

British Broadcasting Corporation. (2012). The Editors. BBC News. Retrieved December 17, 2012, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/

British Broadcasting Corporation. (2013a). BBC R & D. Retrieved March 13, 2013, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/about/introduction_clause87.shtml

British Broadcasting Corporation. (2013b). BBC Trust: Our work. Retrieved April 11, 2013, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/our_work/

British Broadcasting Corporation. (2013c). Inside the BBC: Public purposes. Online. Retrieved March 13, 2013, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/info/purpose/

Bromley, M. (2007). Anyone can be a reporter: Citizen journalism, social change and the case of OhmyNews Communication and Social Change (pp. 175–182). Brisbane: University of Queensland.

Brown, C. (Producer). (2012, November 23). Networks of outrage and hope: Social movements in the Internet age. [Lecture] Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lfPg_5iaGQ

Browne, M. (2012, April 24). Storyful's validation process. Storyful Blog. Retrieved April 28, 2012, from http://blog.storyful.com/2012/04/24/inside-storyful-storyfuls-verification-process/ - .UGPzAhiYpJM

Bruns, A. (2008). Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life, and beyond: From production to produsage. New York: Peter Lang.

Bruns, A., & Bahnisch, M. (2009). Social media: Tools for user-generated content (Vol. 1). Brisbane: Smart Services CRC Pty Ltd.

Bryant, L. (2003). Some thoughts on next steps for the BBC's iCan project. Headshift. Retrieved March 24, 2013, from http://www.headshift.com/our-blog/2003/10/31/some-thoughts-on-next-steps-fo/

Calhoun, C. (2004). Information technology and international public sphere. In P. Schuler & P. Day (Eds.), Shaping the network society: The new role of civil society in cyberspace. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Campbell, V., Gibson, R., Gunter, B., & Touri, M. (2010). News blogs, mainstream news and news agencies. In G. Monaghan & S. Tunney (Eds.), Web

280

journalism: A new form of citizenship? (pp. 29–45). Brighton Sussex Academic Press.

Carey, J. (2000). Journalism and democracy are names for the same thing. Nieman Reports, 54(2), 67–68.

Carroll, B. (2004). Culture clash: Journalism and the communal ethos of the blogosphere. In L. Gurak, S. Antonijevic, L. Johnson, C. Ratliff & J. Reyman (Eds.), Into the blogosphere. Minnesota: University of Minnesota.

Carroll, B., & Richardson, R. (2011). Identification, transparency, interactivity: Towards a new paradigm for credibility for single-voice blogs. International Journal of Interactive Communication Systems and Technologies, 1(1), 19–35.

Carson, A., Wake, A., McNair, B., & Lidberg, J. (2012, March 2). The Finkelstein Inquiry into media regulation: Experts respond. The Conversation. Retrieved March 5, 2012, from http://theconversation.edu.au/the-finkelstein-inquiry-into-media-regulation-experts-respond-5675

Cartablog (Producer). (2009, July 25). Interview with Alan Rusbridger. Cartablog. [Video Interview] Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wra5rdLrWLw

Castells, M. (2001). The Internet galaxy: Reflections on the Internet, business, and society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Castells, M. (2010). Communication power. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Castells, M. (2011, November 24). Social movements in the age of the Internet:

Manuel Castells. Lecture Series. London School of Economics. Retrieved November 27, 2011, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXGgvPGdu34&feature=related

Castells, M. (2012). Networks of outrage and hope. Cambridge, UK: Polity. CBS Interactive Inc. /Associated Press. (2010, November 30). U.S. cables: Iran

armed Hezbollah via ambulances. CBS News Retrieved March 29, 2013, from http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-202_162-7099393.html

Chozick, A. (2012, July 12). News Corp. said to be deciding fate of The Daily. New York Times. Retrieved December 20, 2012, from http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/12/news-corp-said-to-be-deciding-fate-of-the-daily/?ref=media

cloudatlas. (2009, July 9). What does OhmyNews mean to you? OhmyNews. Retrieved August 7, 2009, from http://english.ohmynews.com/articleview/article_view.asp?at_code=437266

cloudatlas. (2010, August 1). OMNI's new approach to citizen journalism. OhmyNews International. Retrieved August 7, 2010, from http://english.ohmynews.com/ArticleView/article_view.asp?menu=A11100&no=386159&rel_no=1&back_url=

Coleman, S. (1999). Can new media invigorate democracy? The Political Quarterley, 70(1), 16–22.

Coleman, S. (2005). Blogs and the new politics of listening. The Political Quarterly, 76(2), 272–280.

Coleman, S., & Blumler, J. (2009). The Internet and democratic citizenship: Theory, practice And policy. Leiden: Cambridge University Press.

Conboy, M. (2004). Journalism: A critical history. London: Sage. Conboy, M. (2006). Tabloid Britain: Constructing a community through lanuage.

London: Routledge.

281

Conde, M. (2010, March 16). What journalists should know about Ushahidi. The Editors Weblog. Retrieved April 17, 2010, from http://www.editorsweblog.org/multimedia/2010/03/what_journalists_should_know_about_ushah.php

Confino, J. (Producer). (2012). Interview: Diane Coyle. Guardian Sustainable Business. [Interview] Retrieved from http://www.guardian.co.uk/sustainable-business/blog/video/diane-coyle-businesses-sustainability-change-video?intcmp=122&utm_source=buffer&buffer_share=1210b

Corbis Corporation. (2012). Corbis - company fact sheet. Retrieved January 17, 2013, from http://corporate.corbis.com/uk/company-fact-sheet/

Couldry, N. (2003). Media rituals: A critical approach. London: Routledge. Couldry, N. (2004). The productive 'consumer' and the dispersed 'citizen'.

International Journal of Cultural Studies, 7(1), 21–32. Couldry, N., Livingstone, S., & Markham, T. (2010). Media consumption and public

engagement: Beyond the presumption of attention (Revised ed.). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Crisell, A. (2002). An introductory history of British broadcasting (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.

Cunningham, B. (2003). Rethinking objective journalism. Columbia Journalism Review. Retrieved July 9, 2007, from http://www.alternet.org/media/16348

Currah, A. (2009). What's happening to our news. In J. Lloyd & G. Linnebank (Eds.), RISJ Challenges. Oxford: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.

Curran, J. (2005). What democracy requires of the media. In G. Overholser & K. Jamieson (Eds.), The press (pp. 120–140). New York: Oxford University Press.

Cushion, S. (2012). The democratic value of news: Why public service media matter. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Dahlgren, L. (2004). The Habermasian public sphere: a specification of the idealized conditions of democratic communication. Studies in Social and Political Thought, 10(2), 2–18.

Dahlgren, P. (1996). Television and the public sphere: Citizenship, democracy, and the media. London: Sage.

Dahlgren, P. (2001). The public sphere and the Net: Structure, space, and communication. In W. Bennett & R. Entman (Eds.), Mediated politics: Communication in the future of democracy (pp. 33–53). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Davies, N. (2009). Flat earth news. London: Vintage. Dean, K. (2003, October 31). BBC offers power to the people. Wired.com. Retrieved

November 30, 2009, from http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/2003/10/60994

Demotix. (2011). Demotix: What we do. Demotix. Retrieved November 17, 2012, from http://www.demotix.com/what-we-do

Department for Culture Media and Sport. (2006). A public service for all: The BBC in the digital age. London: Department for Culture, Media and Sport.

Doctor, K. (2010, August 26). Newsonomics of news orgs surrounded by non-news. Newsonomics. Retrieved October 14, 2010, from http://www.niemanlab.org/2010/08/the-newsonomics-of-news-orgs-surrounded-by-non-news/

282

Domingo, D. (2007, May 23). The myth of interactivity in the daily routines of online newsrooms: An ethnographical approach. Paper presented at the International Communication Association, San Francisco, DA.

Domingo, D. (2008). Interactivity in the daily routines of online newsrooms: Dealing with an uncomfortable myth. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, 680–704.

Doucet, L. (2012, October 10). Does our audience still need us? The TV news reporter in the age of social media. BBC College Of Journalism. Retrieved October 13, 2012, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/blogcollegeofjournalism/posts/Does-our-audience-still-need-us-The-TV-news-reporter-in-the-age-of-social-media

Downie, L., & Schudson, M. (Producer). (2009, October 19). Columbia Journalism School report proposes new steps to support quality public affairs reporting. Columbia News: Office of Communications and Public Affairs. [Video Presentation] Retrieved from http://news.columbia.edu/home/1742

Drezner, D., & Farrell, H. (2004). The power and politics of blogs. Paper presented at the 2004 American Political Science Association, Chicago. http://danieldrezner.com/2010/09/23/journal-articles-2/

Dryzek, J. (2009). Democratization as deliberative capacity building. Comparative Political Studies, 42(11), 1379–1402.

Dunlevy, Maurice. (1998). Objectivity. In M. Breen (Ed.), Journalism: Theory and practice (pp. 119–138). Paddington, NSW: Macleay Press.

Dutton, W. (2009). The fifth estate emerging through the network of networks. Prometheus, 27(1), 1–15.

Dwyer, T. (2013, March 21). Australia's lamentable media diversity needs a regulatory fix. The Conversation. Retrieved March 22, 2013, from http://theconversation.com/australias-lamentable-media-diversity-needs-a-regulatory-fix-12942

Edelman. (2010, February 15). BBC's Richard Sambrook joins Edelman. Edelman London. Retrieved February 17, 2010, from http://www.edelman.co.uk/2010/02/bbcs-richard-sambrook-joins-edelman/

Edmonds, R. (2006, March 10). State of the news media 2006: Skimpy rations. Poynter. Retrieved April 3, 2008, from http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/business-news/the-biz-blog/journalism-and-business-values/74185/state-of-the-news-media-2006-skimpy-rations/

Ekdale, B., Namkoong, K., Fung, T., & Perlmutter, D. (2010). Why blog? (then and now): Exploring the motivations for blogging by popular American political bloggers. New Media & Society, 12(2), 217–234.

Eliasoph, Nina. (1997). "Close to home": The work of avoiding politics. Theory and Society, 26(5), 605–647.

Elliott, C. (2012, December 23). The readers' editor on… The switch to a 'nesting' system on comment threads. Guardian. Retrieved January 8, 2013, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/23/switch-nesting-system-comment-threads

Eltringham, M. (2008, April 8). [Personal Communication]. Eltringham, M. (2009). The audience and news. Paper presented at the Future of

Journalism Conference, London. Eltringham, M. (Producer). (2010, June 25). news:rewired conference panel. [Live

Video Stream] Retrieved from http://www.newsrewired.com/

283

Eltringham, M. (2011, January 12). Signs that Twitter is entering the mainstream. Retrieved January 17, 2011, from http://bbcjournalism.oup.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/blog/2011/01/twitter-enters-the-media-mains.shtml

Esser, F., & Hanitzsch, T. (2012). On the why and how of comparative inquiry in communication studies Handbook of comparative communication research. London: Routledge.

Fanning, E. (2012, August 9). No, Andrew Bolt did not have a point. The Global Mail. Retrieved March 29, 2013, from http://www.theglobalmail.org/feature/no-andrew-bolt-did-not-have-a-point/332/

Filloux, F. (2012, July 16). Why Murdoch's The Daily doesn't fly. Monday Note. Retrieved October 2, 2012, from http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/07/16/why-murdochs-the-daily-doesnt-fly/

Flew, T. (2005). New media: An introduction (2nd ed.). South Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

Flew, T. (2007a). Historical and contemporary perspectives of media and citizenship. In A. Anttiroiko & M. Malkia (Eds.), Encyclopedia of digital government. Hershey: Idea Group Inc.

Flew, T. (2007b). Understanding global media. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Flew, T. (2011). Rethinking public service media and citizenship: Digital strategies

for news and current affairs at Australia's Special Broadcasting Service. International Journal of Communication, 5, 205–232.

Flew, T. (2013, August 8). FactCheck: does Murdoch own 70% of newspapers in Australia? The Conversation. Retrieved August 8, 2013, from http://theconversation.com/factcheck-does-murdoch-own-70-of-newspapers-in-australia-16812

Flew, T., & Gilmour, C. (2003, July 9–11). A tale of two synergies: An institutional analysis of the expansionary strategies of News Corporation and AOL-Time Warner. Paper presented at the Managing Communication for Diversity, Australia and New Zealand Communications Association Conference.

Fox, R., Gibbons, V., & Korris, M. (2010). Audit of political engagement 7. London: Hansard Society.

Freudenstein, R. (2011, June 7). Keynote address. Paper presented at the mumbrella360 Conference, Sydney.

Freudentstein, R. (2009, July 29). Where next for Australia's digital community? Paper presented at the Advertising and Marketing Summit, Sydney.

Fuller, J. (2010). What is happening to news: The information explosion and the crisis in journalism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Gahran, A. (2011, June 2). The Lego approach to storytelling. News Leadership 3.0. Retrieved June 27, 2011, from http://www.knightdigitalmediacenter.org/leadership_blog/comments/20110602_the_lego_approach_to_storytelling/

Gans, J., & Leigh, A. (2012). How partisan is the press? Multiple measures of media slant. Economic Record, 88(280), 127–147.

Garber, M. (2011, November 30). Errol Morris on the art of the interview. Retrieved December 7, 2011, from http://www.niemanlab.org/2011/11/errol-morris-on-the-art-of-the-interview/

284

Gillmor, D. (2004). We the media: Grassroots journalism by the people, for the people Retrieved from http://www.authorama.com/we-the-media-7.html

Gillmor, D. (2006). We the media: Grassroots journalism by the people, for the people. Sebastopol: O'Reilly.

Gillmor, D. (2009). Introduction: Toward a (new) media literacy in a media saturated world. In Z. Papacharissi (Ed.), Journalism and citizenship: New agendas in communication (pp. 1–11). New York: Routledge.

Gimmler, A. (2001). Deliberative democracy, the public sphere and the Internet. Philosophy & Social Criticism, 27(4), 21–39.

Gitlin, T. (2009, May 5). Journalism's many crises. Open Democracy. Retrieved May 8, 2009, from http://www.opendemocracy.net/article/a-surfeit-of-crises-circulation-revenue-attention-authority-and-deference

Global Voices. (2012, December 31). About. Retrieved July 5, 2013, from http://globalvoicesonline.org/about/

Goggin, G. (2011). The intimate turn of mobile news. In G. Meikle & G. Redden (Eds.), News online: Transformations and continuities (pp. 99–114). Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.

Goodier, H. (2012, May 4). BBC online briefing Spring 2012: The participation choice. BBC Internet Blog. Retrieved May 17, 2012, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2012/05/bbc_online_briefing_spring_201_1.html

Goodman, A. (Producer). (2010). The future of news. [Live Video Stream] Retrieved from http://blogs.law.stanford.edu/futureofnews/files/2010/03/20100429-30_CIS_FutureOfJournalism.mov

Goretzki, S. (2009, May 11). Explaining MPs' expenses. The Editors. Retrieved June 2, 2009, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2009/05/explaining_mps_expenses.html

Graf, P. (2004). Report of the independent review of BBC Online. London: Department of Culture Media and Sport.

Granato, L. (2003). Newspaper feature writing. Sydney: UNSW Press. Grandas, I. (2008, June 28). Candlelight 2008: New media and Korea's protests.

OhmyNews International. Retrieved June 30, 2008, from http://english.ohmynews.com/articleview/article_view.asp?menu=c10400&no=382969&rel_no=1

Greenslade, R. (2010, September 23). Public trust in journalists declines still further. guardian.co.uk. Retrieved October 6, 2010, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2010/sep/23/newspapers-dailytelegraph

Guardian Media Group. (2010a). Purpose. Guardian Media Group. Retrieved June 23, 2011, from http://www.gmgplc.co.uk/the-scott-trust/purpose/

Guardian Media Group. (2010b). The Scott Trust. Retrieved June 23, 2011, from http://www.gmgplc.co.uk/the-scott-trust/

Guardian News & Media. (2008, June 3). Comment Is Free: About Us. Retrieved June 7, 2008, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/2008/jun/03/1

Guardian News & Media. (2010, October 25). A panel debate on Web moderation. Retrieved November 17, 2010, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/oct/25/panel-debate-web-moderation?INTCMP=SRCH

285

Guardian News & Media. (2011a). History of guardian.co.uk. Guardian. Retrieved June 23, 2011, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/gnm-archive/guardian-website-timeline

Guardian News & Media. (2011b, June 16). To be a digital-first organisation. Retrieved June 23, 2011, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/gnm-press-office/guardian-news-media-digital-first-organisation

Guardian News & Media. (2013). Investigate your MP's expenses. Retrieved May 8, 2013, from http://mps-expenses.guardian.co.uk/

Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. (1996). Democracy and disagreement. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Habermas, J. (1962, trans. 1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. Cambridge: Polity.

Habermas, J. (1992). Further reflections on the public sphere. In C. Calhoun (Ed.), Habermas and the public sphere (pp. 421–461). Baskerville: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Habermas, J. (2006). Political communication in media society: Does democracy still enjoy an epistemic dimension? The impact of normative theory on empirical research. Communication Theory, 16(4), 411–426.

Hackett, R., & Zhao, Y. (1998). Sustaining democracy? Journalism and the politics of objectivity. Toronto: Garamond Press.

Halliday, J. (2012, October 10). BBC reporting scrutinised after accusations of liberal bias. Retrieved October 17, 2012, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/oct/10/bbc-review-liberal-bias

Hamilton, C. (2012, February 8). Breaking news guidance for BBC journalists. The Editors. Retrieved March 1, 2012, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2012/02/twitter_guidelines_for_bbc_jou.html

Hamilton, J. (2004). All the news that's fit to sell: How the market transforms information into news. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Hamman, R. (2010, May 18). BBC news to give good link? Retrieved June 17, 2010, from http://www.cybersoc.com/2010/05/bbc-news-to-give-good-link.html

Hammond, P., & Herman, E. (2000). Degraded capability: The media and the Kosovo crisis. London Pluto Press.

Hampton, M. (2009). The fourth estate ideal in journalism history. In S. Allan (Ed.), The Routledge companion to news and journalism (Online ed.). New York: Routledge.

Hanusch, F. (2013, May 20). Whose views skew the news? Media chiefs ready to vote out Labor, while reporters lean left. The Conversation Retrieved May 20, 2013, from http://theconversation.com/whose-views-skew-the-news-media-chiefs-ready-to-vote-out-labor-while-reporters-lean-left-13995

Hardy, Q. (2013, June 1). Why big data is not truth. New York Times. Retrieved June 2, 2013, from http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/01/why-big-data-is-not-truth/?smid=tw-share&_r=0

Hargittai, E. (Producer). (2009, June 23). Skill matters: The role of user savvy in different levels of online engagement. [Live Video Stream] Retrieved from http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/interactive

Harrington, S. (2007). How does 'newstainment' actually work? : Ethnographic research methods and contemporary popular news. Paper presented at the International Communication Association, San Francisco.

286

Harrington, S. (2009). Public knowledge beyond journalism: Infotainment, satire and Australian television. (Doctor of Philosophy Thesis), Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane.

Hartley, J. (2005). Journalism as a human right: A cultural approach to journalism. In M. Löffelholz & D. Weaver (Eds.), Journalism research in an era of globalization. London: Routledge.

Hauben, R. (2005). The rise of netizen democracy: A case study of netizens' impact on democracy in South Korea. Retrieved March 13, 2009, from http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/misc/korean-democracy.txt

Held, D. (2006). Models of democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press. Hendler, C. (2010, July 28). The story behind the publication of WikiLeaks's

Afghanistan logs. Columbia Journalism Review. Retrieved July 29, 2010, from http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/the_story_behind_the_publicati.php?page=all

Hermida, A. (2008, April 4). The BBC goes blogging: Is 'Auntie' finally listening? Paper presented at the 9th International Symposium on Online Journalism, University of Texas School of Journalism.

Hermida, A. (2010). Let's talk: How blogging is shaping the BBC's relationship with the public. In S. Tunney & G. Monaghan (Eds.), Web Journalism:// A new form of citizenship (pp. 306–316). Eastbourne: Sussex Academic Press.

Hermida, A. (2011). Twittering the news: The emergence of ambient journalism. Journalism Practice, 4(3), 297–308.

Hermida, A., Fletcher, F., Korell, D., & Logan, D. (2011). Social networks transforming how Canadians get the news: Canadian Media Research Consortium.

Hermida, A., & Thurman, N. (2008). A clash of cultures: The integration of user-generated content within professional journalistic frameworks at British newspaper websites. Journalism Practice, 2(3).

Herrmann, S. (2010, March 19). BBC News linking policy. The Editors. Retrieved April 27, 2010, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2010/03/bbc_news_linking_policy.html

Herrmann, S. (2012a, September 20–22). Designing digital newsrooms. Paper presented at the 2012 Online News Association Conference, Hyatt Regency, San Francisco.

Herrmann, S. (Producer). (2012b). Meet the media with Steve Herrmann of the BBC Online. [Video] Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_mPlP1gJNU

Hespos, T. (2008). How hyperlinks ought to change the advertising business. In J. Turow & L. Tsui (Eds.), The hyperlinked society: Questioning connections in the digital age (pp. 137–144). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Hesse-Biber, S., & Leavy, P. (2010). The practice of qualitative research. Los Angeles: Sage.

Highfield, A. (2007, October 31). Welcome. BBC Internet Blog. Retrieved November 7, 2007, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2007/10/welcome.html

Hogarth-Scott, P. (2010, April 21). Australian organisations rush to embrace social media, Media Release, Community Engine.

287

Holmes, J. (2012, November 14). The bonanza of blunders at the BBC. The Drum. Retrieved November 20, 2012, from http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-11-13/holmes-a-bonanza-of-blunders-at-the-bbc/4367750 - comments

Horrocks, P. (2008a, January 7). Citizen journalism: For the 1% or the 99%? University of Leeds' Institute of Communications Studies. Retrieved January 17, 2008, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2008/01/value_of_citizen_journalism.html

Horrocks, P. (2008b). The end of fortress journalism. Paper presented at the Future of Journalism Conference, London.

Howe, J. (2006). The rise of crowdsourcing. WIRED, 6(14). Hu, M., Liu, S., Wei, F., Wu, Y., Stasko, J., & Ma, K. (2012). Breaking news on

Twitter. Paper presented at the ACM Annual Conference on Human factors in Computing Systems, Austin, Texas.

Hudson, G., & Temple, M. (2010). We are not all journalists now. In G. Monaghan & S. Tunney (Eds.), Web Journalism//: A new form of citizenship? (pp. 64–76). Brighton: Sussex Academic Press.

Hughes, S. (Producer). (2012). Social media newsgathering. [Video] Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=1sPeTaJ2aWs

Hunter, D. (2006, May 30). A general theory of information policy. Retrieved June 23, 2006, from http://crookedtimber.org/2006/05/30/a-general-theory-of-information-policy/ - more-4727

Hunter, I. (2011, January 24). Delivering quality first on BBC Online: Social media. BBC Internet Blog. Retrieved February 27, 2011, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2011/01/delivering_quality_first_on_bb.html

Indvik, L. (2012, July 17). The Guardian wants you to aggregate the Web's best journalism. Retrieved July 27, 2012, from http://mashable.com/2012/07/17/guardian-smarttakes/

Ingram, M. (2008, November 26). Yes, Twitter is a source of journalism. mathewingram.com/work. Retrieved November 27, 2009, from http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2008/11/26/yes-twitter-is-a-source-of-journalism/

Irby, J., & Bird, K. (2007). Reporting that matters: Public affairs coverage. Boston: Pearson Allyn and Bacon.

James, B. (2012, January 23). WHYS and Google+: The next step. World Service. Retrieved January 27, 2012, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/worldhaveyoursay/2012/01/weve_been_experimenting_with_g.html - 302936

Jarvis, J. (2010, April 20–21). Comments are backwards. Paper presented at the 140 Characters Conference: Exploring the State of Now, New York

Jensen, K., & Jankowski, N. (1991). A handbook of qualitative methodologies for mass communication research. London: Routledge.

Jeon, D-S., & Esfahani, N. (2012). News aggregators and competition among newspapers in the Internet: NET Institute Working Paper No. 12–20.

Kamlya, G. (2009, February 17). The death of the news. Salon.com. Retrieved March 17, 2009, from http://www.salon.com/2009/02/17/newspapers_2/

Karp, S. (2011, May 19). How to make it easy for newspapers to link on the Web. Retrieved June 27, 2011, from http://blog.publish2.com/2011/05/19/how-to-make-it-easy-for-newspapers-to-link-on-the-web/

288

Keating, P. (2012, May 11). Uhlmann impertinent, off point. The Drum. Retrieved May 17, 2012, from http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/4004234.html

Keen, A. (2007). The cult of the amateur: How today's Internet is killing our culture. New York: Doubleday.

Keller, B. (2011, January 26). Dealing with Assange and the WikiLeaks secrets. New York Times. Retrieved January 27, 2011, from http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/30/magazine/30Wikileaks-t.html?_r=4&ref=global-home

Keller, J. (2011, April 4). Photojournalism in the age of new media. Retrieved April 7, 2011, from http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/04/photojournalism-in-the-age-of-new-media/73083/?single_page=true

Kerr, A. (2011, September 23). Powerful Typhoon Roke causes death and damage. Storyful. Retrieved September 27, 2011, from http://storyful.com/stories/1000008246

Khan, I. (2009, November 24). Statement by Irene Khan, Amnesty International Secretary General. Retrieved 2009, November 24, from http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/news/room-improvement-south-korea-human-rights-20091124

Kiss, J. (2009, March 5). Sky News appoints Twitter correspondent. Guardian. Retrieved March 7, 2009, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/pda/2009/mar/05/twitter-socialnetworking1

Kiss, J. (2010, May 20). Guardian announces commercial launch of open platform. Online. Retrieved May 27, 2010, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/pda/2010/may/20/guardian-open-platform

Knott, M. (2013, January 9). Foreign bureaux get the chop as News, Fairfax cut costs. Crikey. Retrieved March 24, 2013, from http://www.crikey.com.au/2013/01/09/foreign-bureaux-get-the-chop-as-news-fairfax-cut-costs/

Kohut, A. (2006). News consumption and believability study PEW Global Attitudes Project. Washington: Pew Research Center

Kopytoff, V. (2011, February 20). Blogs wane as the young drift to sites like Twitter. Retrieved February 27, 2011, from http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/21/technology/internet/21blog.html?_r=0

Kovach, B., & Rosenstiel, T. (2001). The elements of journalism: What newspeople should know and the public should expect. New York: Crown Publishers.

Kovach, B., & Rosenstiel, T. (2010). Blur. New York: Bloomsbury. Kramer, S. (2012, July 13). Virtual life on the line, The Daily launches WKND.

Retrieved July 17, 2012, from http://paidcontent.org/2012/07/13/virtual-life-on-the-line-the-daily-launches-wknd/

Kreisler, H. (Producer). (2001, May 19). Identity and change in the network society: Conversation with Manuel Castells. Conversations with History. [Video] Retrieved from http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people/Castells/castells-con0.html.

Küng-Shankleman, L. (2000). Inside the BBC and CNN: Managing media organizations. New York: Routledge.

Kwak, K. (2011). From 'revolutionary changes' to 'things as usual': The political role of online media in South Korea. Media International Australia, Incorporating Culture and Policy, 141(December), 87–97.

289

Kwek, G. (2011, August 9). Leap of life: Woman pictured jumping from burning building. Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved August 9, 2011, from http://www.theage.com.au/world/leap-of-life-woman-pictured-jumping-from-burning-building-20110809-1ikcj.html

Larsen, S. (2010). Should local voices bring us foreign news? Nieman Reports, Fall. Lavrusik, V. (2011a, February 28). Facebook's growing role in social journalism.

Mashable. Retrieved March 7, 2011, from http://mashable.com/2011/02/27/facebooks-growing-role-in-social-journalism/

Lavrusik, V. (2011b, May 12). Vadim Lavrusik: How journalists can make use of Facebook pages. The Nieman Journalism Lab. Retrieved May 21, 2011, from http://www.niemanlab.org/2011/05/vadim-lavrusik-how-journalists-can-make-use-of-facebook-pages/

Lee, E. (2012, December 20). The New York Times paywall is working better than anyone had guessed. Tech Blog. Retrieved December 21, 2012, from http://go.bloomberg.com/tech-blog/2012-12-20-the-new-york-times-paywall-is-working-better-than-anyone-had-guessed/

Leigh, D., & Harding, L. (2011). WikiLeaks: Inside Julian Assange's war on secrecy. London: Guardian Books.

Lenhart, A., & Fox, S. (2006). Blogging is bringing new voices to the online world. Pew Internet & American Life Project. Retrieved December 7, 2009, from http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2006/Bloggers.aspx?r=1

Leveson, B. (2012). An Inquiry into the culture, practices and ethics of the press. London: House of Commons.

Leveson Inquiry. (2012). (Day 79 PM). London: Merrill Corporation Retrieved from http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Transcript-of-Afternoon-Hearing-28-May-2012.pdf.

Levy, D. (2011a, May 9). The future of Europe's journalism. E! Sharp Magazine. Retrieved September 6, 2011, from http://www.esharp.eu/Web-specials/The-future-of-Europe-s-journalism

Levy, D. (2011b). What future for journalism. Oxford: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.

Levy, N. (2004). Bias, balance and problems of media objectivity. Online Opinion. June. Retrieved September 24, 2006, from http://www.onelineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=2312

Lilley, A. (2007, October 15). Is Web 3.0 a brand relaunch - just like Kylie's new look? Monday Media. Retrieved December 3, 2007, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2007/oct/15/mondaymediasection8

Linehan, G. (2011, June 7). The perils of making a writer get up early. Now That I Have Your Attention. Retrieved September 19, 2011, from http://glinner.posterous.com/56078994

Little, M. (2011). Storyful: About us. Storyful. Retrieved December 28, 2011, from http://storyful.com/about

Livingstone, S. (2003). On the challenges of cross-national comparative media research. European Journal of Communication, 18(4), 477–500.

Lowrey, W. (2006). Mapping the journalism–blogging relationship. Journalism, 7(4), 477–500.

MacKinnon, R. (2005, February 1). Blogging, journalism and credibility. Paper presented at the Blogging, Journalism, & Credibility: Battleground and Common Ground Conference, Harvard University.

290

Madrigal, A. (2010, December 13). How to think about WikiLeaks. The Atlantic. Retrieved April 16, 2011, from http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2010/12/how-to-think-about-wikileaks/67689/

Manne, R. (2011, September 5). Power without responsibility: Rupert Murdoch's Australian. Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Retrieved March 7, 2013, from http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2011/09/05/3309666.htm

Mansbridge, J. (1999). Everyday talk in the deliberative system. In S. Macedo (Ed.), Deliberative politics: Essays on democracy and disagreement (pp. 211–239). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Markham, T. (2010). The case against the democratic influence of the Internet on journalism. In G. Monaghan & S. Tunney (Eds.), Web journalism:// A new form of citizenship? (pp. 77–94). Brighton: Sussex Academic Press.

Marr, D. (2011, December). The politics of news. The Monthly. Retrieved March 17, 2013, from http://www.themonthly.com.au/issue/2011/december/1330563322/david-marr/politics-news

Marsh, K. (2006, June 27). What does an editor do? The Editors. Retrieved October 17, 2006, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2006/06/what_does_an_editor_do.html

Marsh, K. (2008, November 26). Death of the story. Paper presented at the Future of Journalism Conference, London.

Marsh, K. (2011, April 6). Face the future: Tools for the modern media age. Paper presented at the News Rewired Conference, London.

Mathieson, C. (2009, February 26). [Personal Communication]. McAthy, R. (2012, April 3). How to: Verify content from social media.

journalism.co.uk. Retrieved May 12, 2012, from http://www.journalism.co.uk/news-features/how-to-verify-content-from-social-media/s5/a548645/

McChesney, R. (2000). Rich media poor democracy: Communication politics in dubious times. Champaign: University of Illinois Press.

McChesney, R. (2011). The crisis of journalism and the Internet. In G. Meikle & G. Redden (Eds.), News online: Transformations and continuities (pp. 53–68). Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.

McChesney, R., & Nichols, J. (2010). The death and life of American journalism: The media revolution that will begin the world again. New York: Perseus Books Group.

McCombs, M. (1993). News influence on our pictures of the world. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (pp. 1–18). Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

McKee, A. (2005). The public sphere: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

McNair, B. (2000). Journalism and democracy: An evaluation of the political public sphere. London: Routledge.

McNair, B. (2005). What is journalism. In H. Burgh (Ed.), Making journalists: Diverse models, global issues (pp. 25–43). London Routledge.

McNair, B. (2006). Cultural chaos: Journalism, news and power in a globalised world. Oxon: Routledge.

291

McPherson, J. (2010). OMNI's new direction. OhmyNews International. Retrieved July 9, 2010, from http://international.ohmynews.com/2010/09/07/omnis-new-direction/

McQuail, D. (2005). McQuail's mass communication theory (5th ed.). London: Sage Megalogenis, G. (2009, March 2). [Personal Communication]. Meier, P. (2011). Theorizing Ushahidi: An academic treatise. iRevolution. Retrieved

November 17, 2011, from http://irevolution.net/2011/10/02/theorizing-ushahidi/

Meikle, G. (2003). Indymedia and the new Net news. M/C Journal, 6(2). Melbourne Press Club (Producer). (2012, November 28). Corporate lunch with Kim

Williams. [Video] Retrieved from http://www.melbournepressclub.com/events/corporate-lunch-kim-williams - KimWilliamsMPC

Merritt, D., & McCombs, M. (2004). The two W's of journalism: Why and what of public affairs reporting. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Metcalfe, B. (2008). Apture trial on BBC News website a great success. The virtual investor. Retrieved March 23, 2010, from http://benmetcalfe.com/blog/2008/08/apture-trial-on-bbc-news-website-a-great-success/

Meyer, P. (1991). The new precision journalism. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Meyer, P. (2003). The proper role of the news media in a democratic society: Is it enough to simply cover the news? In J. Harper & T. Yantek (Eds.), Media, profit, and politics: Competing priorities in an open society (pp. 11–17). Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.

Meyer, P. (2004). Vanishing newspaper: Saving journalism in the information age. Columbia: University of Missouri Press.

Meyer, P. (2008, March 28). Raising the ante again. niemanwatchdog.org. Retrieved August 18, 2009, from http://www.niemanwatchdog.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Showcase.view&showcaseid=76&stoplayout=true&print=true

Meyer, T., & Hinchman, L. (2002). Media democracy: How the media colonize politics. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Middleberg, D., & Ross, S. (2001). The seventh annual print and broadcast survey of media in the wired world: Pula.

Miller, R. (2002). The Frankenstein syndrome: The creation of mega-media conglomerates and ethical modeling in journalism. Journal of Business Ethics, 36, 105–110.

Min, J. (2005). Journalism as a conversation. Nieman Reports, Winter. Min, J. (2008a, March 7). The country of early adopters. Paper presented at the

Media 08 Conference, Sydney. Min, J. (2008b). [Personal Communication]. Moeller, S. (2008). Media and democracy. In M. Boler (Ed.), Digital media and

democracy: Tactics in hard times (pp. 167–196). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Morozov, E. (2011, February 5). The age of the WikiLeaks-style vigilante geek is over. Guardian. Retrieved August 18, 2011, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/feb/07/age-wikileaks-style-vigilante-geek-over

292

Mortensen, T., & Walker, J. (2002). Blogging thoughts: Personal publication as an online research tool. In A. Morrison (Ed.), Researching ICTs in context (Vol. 3, pp. 249–279). Oslo: University of Oslo.

Mottershead, G. (Producer). (2012, October 18). In conversation with the Guardian's Joanna Geary. [Interview] Retrieved from http://soundcloud.com/cardiff-2/joanna_geary_the_guardian

Muller, D. (2007, August 2). Poll bloggers: Keeping the b-stards honest. Crikey. Retrieved April 7, 2013, from http://www.crikey.com.au/2007/08/02/poll-bloggers-keeping-the-b-stards-honest/

Mumbrella (Producer). (2013, May 14). News Limited's Campbell Reid talks paywalls. [Video] Retrieved from http://mumbrella.com.au/mumbrella-hangout-news-limiteds-campbell-reid-talks-paywalls-155283

Murdoch, J. (2009, August 28). The absence of trust. MacTaggart Lecture. Retrieved August 29, 2009, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/aug/28/james-murdoch-bbc-mactaggart-edinburgh-tv-festival

Murdoch, R. (2005). Speech by Rupert Murdoch to the American Society of Newspaper Editors. American Society of Newspaper Editors. Retrieved May 8, 2013, from http://www.newscorp.com/news/news_247.html

Murdoch, R. (2010a, April 6). Rupert Murdoch: The making of a media mogul. The GW Global Media Institute. Interview Transcript. Retrieved August 12, 2010, from http://kalb.gwu.edu/archives.html

Murdoch, R. (2010b, October 21). Rupert Murdoch's inaugural Margaret Thatcher lecture. The Guardian. News Article/Transcript. Retrieved October 24, 2010, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/oct/21/rupert-murdoch-inaugural-margaret-thatcher-lecture

Murray, A. (2011, May 18). BBC processes for verifying social media content. BBC College of Journalism. Retrieved September 7, 2011, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/journalism/blog/2011/05/bbcsms-bbc-procedures-for-veri.shtml

Negroponte, N. (1995). Being digital. London: Coronet Books, Hodder & Stoughton. Neighbour, S. (2011, July). The United States of Chris Mitchell: The power of

Rupert Murdoch and the Australian's Editor-in-Chief. The Monthly. Retrieved May 25, 2013, from http://www.themonthly.com.au/issue/2011/july/1315015434/sally-neighbour/united-states-chris-mitchell

Nerone, J. (1995). Last rights: Revisiting four theories of the press. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

Newman, N. (2009). The rise of social media and its impact on mainstream journalism (pp. 1–60). Oxford: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.

News Corporation. (2010). Newspapers and information services. Operations. Retrieved June 18, 2011, from http://www.newscorp.com/operations/newspapers.html

News Corporation. (2012). Earnings release for the quarter ended March 31, 2012. New York: News Corporation.

News Limited (Producer). (2012). Pixels and ink: A discussion on the future of journalism. [Video] Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=lSRhDqeBtmg

293

NewsSpace. (2013). Audit Bureau of Circulation data shows 27 per cent growth in digital subscriptions to The Australian. News Australian Sales. Retrieved February 15, 2013, from http://www.newsspace.com.au/node/3142

Nicholas, D. (1998). The changing information environment: The impact of the Internet on information seeking behaviour in the media The media and the Internet. London: British Library.

Niles, R. (2007, December 21). Five lessons from 2007. Online Journalism Review. Retrieved October 20, 2009, from http://www.ojr.org/071220niles/

Nolan, M. (2011, April 28). Join Storyful's team of 'creative commoners' on royal wedding day. Storyful. Retrieved July 1, 2011, from http://blog.storyful.com/2011/04/28/join-Storyfuls-team-of-creative-commoners-on-royal-wedding-day/

O'Reilly, T. (2005, October 1). Web 2.0: Compact Definition. Retrieved February 28 2013, from http://radar.oreilly.com/2005/10/web-20-compact-definition.html

Oates, S., Owen, D., & Gibson, R. (2006). The Internet and politics: Citizens, voters and activists. London: Routledge.

Ofcom Media. (2006, March). New media literacy role for the BBC? Media literacy e-bulletin 5. Retrieved January 20, 2007, from http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/market-data-research/market-data/media-literacy-bulletin/

Oh, S. (2010). The evolution of news and the Internet Working party on the information economy (pp. 1–96). Paris: Organizatisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

Oh, Y. (2006, July 11, 2006). Welcome to Korea and OhmyNews. Retrieved February 25, 2007, from http://english.ohmynews.com/articleview/article_view.asp?article_class=11&no=304539&rel_no=1

Oh, Y. (2010, May 5–7). The present and future of citizen journalism. Paper presented at the Lift 10 Conference, Geneva.

Oliver, L. (2011). Face the future: Tools for the modern media age. Paper presented at the News Rewired Conference, London.

Olmstead, K., Mitchell, A., & Rosenstiel, T. (2011, May 9). Navigating News Online. Project For Excellence in Journalism (PEJ). Retrieved December 3, 2011, from http://www.journalism.org/analysis_report/who_drives_traffic_news

Olmstead, K., Sasseen, J., Mitchell, A., & Rosenstiel, T. (2012). The state of the news media 2012. New York: The Pew Research Center.

Oltermann, P., Strauss, J., & Maynard, P. (Producer). (2012). Manuel Castells: How modern political movements straddle urban space and cyberspace. [Video] Retrieved from http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/video/2013/mar/25/manuel-castells-political-cyberspace-video

Osnos, P. (2009, December 29). An elegy for journalism? Foreign Affairs. Retrieved February 21, 2010, from http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/65729/peter-osnos/an-elegy-for-journalism

Parkinson, J. (2006). Deliberating in the real world: Problems of legitimacy in deliberative democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Picard, R. (2004). Commercialism and newspaper quality. Newspaper Research Journal, 25(1), 54–65.

294

Piecing together the reports, and deciding what to publish. (2010, July 25). New York Times. Online. Retrieved August 10, 2010, from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/26/world/26editors-note.html

Pierce, J. (2010). World Internet project international report 2010 (pp. 1–10). Los Angeles: USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism.

Plotz, D. (2000, November 23). Fox News channel: It's not fair. It's not balanced. So what? Slate. Retrieved October 29, 2009, from http://slate.msn.com/id/93999/

Plunkett, J. (2012, November 12). Newsnight: How years of cuts have hit the programme. Retrieved November 15, 2012, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/nov/12/jeremy-paxman-newsnight-budget-cut-claims

Posetti, J. (2009, May 27). How journalists are using Twitter in Australia. Media Shift. Retrieved June 15, 2009, from http://www.pbs.org/mediashift/2009/05/how-journalists-are-using-twitter-in-australia147.html

Powazek, D. (2008, July 29). 10 ways newspapers can improve comments. Powazek. Retrieved August 28, 2008, from http://powazek.com/posts/1063

Putnam, R. (1995). Bowling alone: America's declining social capital. Journal of Democracy, 6(1), 65–78.

Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Quinn, S. (2006, June 1). Breaking news boosts spread of citizen journalism: The age of democratization of news is here. OhmyNews International. Retrieved January 13, 2008, from http://english.ohmynews.com/articleview/article_view.asp?menu=c10400&no=296015&rel_no=1

Rendall, S., & Broughel, T. (2003). Amplifying officials, squelching dissent. FAIR: Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting. Retrieved June 27, 2011, from http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1145

Repko, A., Newell, W., & Szostak, R. (2012). Case studies in interdisciplinary research. Los Angeles: Sage Publications, Inc.

Reynolds, G., & Lenhart, A. (Producer). (2006, February 26). Instapundit. The Kojo Nnamdi show. [Radio Broadcast] Retrieved from http://thekojonnamdishow.org/shows/2006-02-28 - 10487

Reynolds, N. (2008, August 20). Interesting stuff 2008-08-20. BBC Internet Blog. Retrieved July 4, 2009, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/08/interesting_stuff_200808.html

Reynolds, N. (2009, July 31). Blogs and boards: Getting the balance right. BBC Internet Blog. Retrieved August 9, 2009, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2009/07/blogs_and_boards_getting_the_b.html

Rieh, S., & Danielson, D. (2007). Credibility: A multidisciplinary framework. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 41(1), 307–364.

Rivera, R. (Producer). (2011, November 28). BBC Online industry briefing: Final Q & A. BBC Internet Blog. [Video] Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2011/11/industry_briefing_rivera_question_answer.html

295

Roberts, D. (2011, October 9). The Guardian is opening up its newslists so you can help us make news. Guardian. Retrieved December 13, 2011, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/oct/09/the-guardian-newslists-opening-up

Roberts, J. (2012, September 2). Twitter is a speech-loving tech company: The @Amac interview. GIGAOM. Retrieved September 3, 2012, from http://gigaom.com/2012/09/02/twitter-is-a-speech-loving-tech-company-the-amac-interview/

Robinson, N. (2001, December 5). What is Newslog. BBC News. Retrieved March 13, 2009, from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1692330.stm

Rogers, S. (2011, July 28). Data journalism at the Guardian: What is it and how do we do it? Guardian. Retrieved August 4, 2011, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jul/28/data-journalism

Rosen, J., October 2). The production of innocence and the reporting of American politics. Press Think. Retrieved October 9, from http://pressthink.org/2013/10/the-production-of-innocence-in-the-reporting-of-american-politics-a-pressthink-analysis/

Rosen, J. (2006, June 27). The people formerly known as the audience. Pressthink. Retrieved August 5, 2007, from http://archive.pressthink.org/2006/06/27/ppl_frmr.html

Rosen, J. (2009, April 12). He said, she said journalism: Lame formula in the land of the active user. Press Think. Retrieved May 12, 2009, from http://journalism.nyu.edu/pubzone/weblogs/pressthink/2009/04/12/hesaid_shesaid.html

Rosen, J. (2010a, March 7). News without the narrative needed to make sense of the news: What I will say at South by Southwest. Press Think. Retrieved March 23, 2010, from http://journalism.nyu.edu/pubzone/weblogs/pressthink/2008/08/13/national_explain.html

Rosen, J. (2010b, July 7). Objectivity as a form of persuasion: A few notes for Marcus Brauchli. Press Think. Retrieved August 21, 2010, from http://pressthink.org/2010/07/objectivity-as-a-form-of-persuasion-a-few-notes-for-marcus-brauchli

Rosen, J. (2010c, Feb 21). The quest for innocence and the loss of reality in political journalism. Press Think. Retrieved March 18, 2012, from http://archive.pressthink.org/2010/02/21/innocence.html - innocence

Rosen, J. (2012a, August 5). Everything that's wrong with political journalism in one Washington Post item. Press Think. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from http://pressthink.org/2012/08/everything-thats-wrong-with-political-journalism-in-one-washington-post-item/

Rosen, J. (2012b, July 12). If Mitt Romney were running a "post-truth" campaign, would the political press report it? Press Think. Retrieved August 12, 2012, from http://pressthink.org/2012/07/if-mitt-romney-were-running-a-post-truth-campaign-would-the-political-press-report-it/

Rosenstiel, T. (2008). The state of the news media 2008. Project for Excellence in Journalism. Washington: Pew Research Center.

Rosenstiel, T. (2009a, September 24). The future of newspapers: The impact on the economy and democracy. Paper presented at the Joint Economic Committee, United States Congress, Washington.

296

Rosenstiel, T. (2009b). The state of the news media 2009. Project For Excellence in Journalism. Washington: Pew Research Center.

Rosenstiel, T. (2010). The state of the news media 2010. Project For Excellence in Journalism. Washington: Pew Research Center.

Rotman, E., & Forrester, S. (2008). The fragmentation of yesterday's newspaper. Cambridge, MA: Forrester Research.

Rovira, J. (2011, February). Interview with Manuel Castells: "The popular uprisings in the Arab world perhaps constitute the most important Internet-led and facilitated change". Retrieved February 29, 2011, from http://www.uoc.edu/portal/english/sala-de-premsa/actualitat/entrevistes/2011/manuel_castells.html

Rusbridger, A. (2009a, October 19). First read: The mutualized future is bright. Columbia Journalism Review. Retrieved October 29, 2009, from http://www.cjr.org/reconstruction/the_mutualized_future_is_brigh.php

Rusbridger, A. (2009b). I've seen the future and it's mutual. British Journalism Review, 20(19), 19–26.

Rusbridger, A. (2010a, January 25). The Hugh Cudlipp lecture: Does journalism exist? Guardian. Retrieved February 10, 2010, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/jan/25/cudlipp-lecture-alan-rusbridger

Rusbridger, A. (2010b, November 19). The splintering of the fourth estate. Guardian. Retrieved March 8, 2011, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/nov/19/open-collaborative-future-journalism

Rusbridger, A. (2011, July 25). Openness - the mind, body and soul of our journalism. Guardian. Retrieved August 5, 2011, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/sustainability/sustainability-report-editorial-rusbridger

Rusbridger, A. (2013, April 4). Why data matters at The Guardian. Guardian. Retrieved May 2, 2013, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2013/apr/04/data-journalism-guardian-rusbridger

Rutigliano, l. (2007). Emergent communication networks as civic journalism. In M. Tremayne (Ed.), Blogging, citizenship, and the future of media (pp. 225–237). London: Routledge.

Sabbagh, D. (2011, April 12). Bloggers take legal action over Huffington Post sale. Guardian. Retrieved September 11, 2011, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/apr/12/arianna-huffington-post-sale

Sambrook, R. (2004, October 27). Holding on to objectivity. Poliak Lecture. Retrieved May 3, 2007, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/speeches/stories/sambrook_poliak.shtml

Sambrook, R. (2008, April 7). [Personal Communication]. Sambrook, R. (2009a, June 14). Iran: Rumours everywhere. Sacred Facts. Retrieved

June 15, 2009, from http://sambrook.typepad.com/sacredfacts/2009/06/iran-rumours-everywhere.html

Sambrook, R. (2009b, June 14). Twittering the uprising. Sacred Facts. Retrieved June 16, 2009, from http://sambrook.typepad.com/sacredfacts/2009/06/twittering-the-uprising.html

297

Sambrook, R. (2010). Are foreign correspondents redundant? The changing face of international news. Oxford: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism

Sambrook, R. (2011, 13–17 April). The foreign correspondent in the era of social media. Paper presented at the International Journalism Festival, Perugia.

Sambrook, R. (2012). Delivering trust: Impartiality and objectivity in the digital age (pp. 1–44). Oxford: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.

Scannell, P. (1989). Public service broadcasting and modern public life. Media Culture Society, 11(2), 135–166.

Schanberg, S. (2005, November 22). If old journalism dies. The Village Voice. Retrieved July 7, 2007, from http://www.villagevoice.com/2005-11-22/news/if-old-journalism-dies/

Schechter, D. (2005). The death of media and the fight to save democracy. Hoboken, NJ: Melville House.

Schifferes, S. (2003, March 18). US names 'coalition of the willing'. BBC News. Retrieved July 7, 2007, from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2862343.stm

Schiller, B. (2010). Even in digital age, 'being there' still matters in foreign reporting. Nieman Reports, Fall.

Schudson, M. (1978). Discovering the news: A social history of American newspapers. New York: Basic Books.

Schudson, M. (2002). The news media as political institutions. Annual Review of Political Science, 5(June), 249–269.

Schudson, M. (2006). The virtues of an unlovable press. In J. Lloyd & J. Seaton (Eds.), What can be done? Making the media and politics better (pp. 23–32). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing

Scott, C. (1921, November 29, 2002). A hundred years. Comment is Free. Retrieved December 5, 2012, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2002/nov/29/1

Searls, D. (2011, May 16). Why not link to sources? Doc Searls Weblog. Retrieved July 17, 2011, from http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2011/05/16/why-not-link-to-sources/

Selwyn, N. (2004). Reconsidering political and popular understandings of the digital divide. New Media & Society, 6(3), 341–362.

Sharma, R. (2011, July 21). So what can Google+ do for journalists? Good question. College of Journalism. Retrieved August 4, 2011, from http://bbcjournalism.oup.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/blog/2011/07/so-what-can-google-do-for-jour.shtml

Sheridan, G. (2012, September 25). Storyful tips and tools: Locating videos on a map. Storyful. Retrieved September 28, 2012, from http://blog.storyful.com/2012/09/25/storyful-tips-and-tools-locating-videos-on-a-map/ - .UGPt3hiYrV0

Shiel, J. (2012, January 13). New home page for BBC blogs. BBC Internet Blog. Retrieved April 18, 2012, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2011/01/new_home_page_for_bbc_blogs.html

Shin, D., & Chu, Y. (2004). The quality of democracy in South Korea and Taiwan: Subjective assessments from the perspectives of ordinary citizens. Asian Barometer Project Office. Retrieved December 4, 2009, from http://www.asianbarometer.org/newenglish/publications/

Shin, K. (2006). The citizens' movement in Korea. Korea Journal, 46(2), 5–34.

298

Shirky, C. (2003, February 8). Power laws, weblogs, and inequality. Clay Shirky's Writings About the Internet. Retrieved July 17, 2007, from http://www.shirky.com/writings/powerlaw_weblog.html

Shirky, C. (2009, August 3). Not an upgrade - an upheaval. Cato-Unbound. Retrieved September 3, 2010, from http://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/07/13/clay-shirky/not-an-upgrade-an-upheaval/

Shirky, C. (2011, July 9). Why we need the new news environment to be chaotic. Clay Shirky's Writings About the Internet. Blog. Retrieved November 18, 2011, from http://www.shirky.com/weblog/2011/07/we-need-the-new-news-environment-to-be-chaotic/

Simons, M. (2007, June 26). Crikey bias-o-meter: The newspapers. Crikey. Retrieved May 21, 2013, from http://www.crikey.com.au/2007/06/26/crikey-bias-o-meter-the-newspapers/

Singer, J. (2007). Contested autonomy. Journalism Studies, 8(1), 79–95. Singer, J. (2011). Taking responsibility. In J. Singer, A. Hermida, D. Domingo, A.

Heinonen, S. Paulussen, Q. Thorsten, R. Zvi & M. Vujnobic (Eds.), Participatory journalism: Guarding open gates at online newspapers (pp. 119–138). Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.

Singer, J., & Ashman, I. (2009). "Comment is free, but facts are sacred": User-generated content and ethical constructs at The Guardian. Journal of Mass Media Ethics: Exploring Questions of Media Morality, 24(1), 3–21.

Smith, A. (2008, July 2). New numbers for blogging and blog readership. Pew Internet & American Life Project Retrieved December 7, 2009, from http://www.pewinternet.org/Commentary/2008/July/New-numbers-for-blogging-and-blog-readership.aspx

Smith, Z. (2008). Introducing mulitimedia to the newsroom. Paper presented at the Future of Journalism Conference, London.

Sobel, J. (2010, November 3). The state of the blogosphere 2010. Retrieved April 1, 2011, from http://technorati.com/blogging/article/state-of-the-blogosphere-2010-introduction/

Sonderman, J. (2011, May 24). Why the New York Times replaced its Twitter 'cyborg' with people this week. The Poynter Institute. Retrieved August 30, 2012, from http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/media-lab/social-media/133431/new-york-times-tries-human-powered-tweeting-to-see-if-users-value-the-interaction/

Sonderman, J. (2012, December 3). 2 major lessons from the demise of The Daily. The Poynter Institute. Retrieved April 3, 2013, from http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/media-lab/mobile-media/196885/2-major-lessons-from-the-demise-of-the-daily/

Souviron, A. (2011, October 19). Social media part of daily output. BBC College of Journalism. Retrieved February 7, 2012, from http://bbcjournalism.oup.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/blog/2011/10/social-media-part-of-daily-output.shtml

Stack, M. (2006, July 26). Agonies anew for team on the side of the angels. The Age. Online. Retrieved October 17, 2009, from http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/we-have-an-accident/2006/07/25/1153816182440.html

Stake, R. (2001). Case studies. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 435–454). London: Sage Publications.

299

Standage, R., Rosen, J., & Carr, N. (2011, July 12). The news industry: Statements. Economist. Retrieved August 9, 2011, from http://www.economist.com/debate/days/view/720

Stone, J. (2011, February 15). 3 things that BBC Online has given to online journalism (comment 7). Online Journalism Blog. Retrieved February 16, 2011, from http://onlinejournalismblog.wordpress.com/2011/02/14/3-things-that-bbc-online-gave-to-online-journalism/

Storyful. (2010). Storyful case studies. Retrieved December 31, 2012, from http://storyful.com/case-studies/

Stray, J. (2010, June 10). Linking by the numbers. Nieman Journalism Lab. Retrieved June 2, 2011, from http://www.niemanlab.org/2010/06/linking-by-the-numbers-how-news-organizations-are-using-links-or-not/

Sturm, J. (2009, September 24). The future of newspapers: The impact on the economy and democracy. Paper presented at the Joint Economic Committee, United States Congress, Washington.

Summers, A. (2011, October). The Bolt factor. The Monthly. 72. Retrieved May 19, 2013, from http://www.themonthly.com.au/issue/2011/october/1318315099/anne-summers/bolt-factor

Summers, R. (2011, March 28). New BBC comments module: Technical overview. BBC Internet Blog. Retrieved April 18, 2011, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2011/03/new_bbc_comments_module_-_tech.html

Sunstein, C. (2001a). The daily we. The Boston Review, 2001(Summer). Sunstein, C. (2001b). Republic.com. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Sunstein, C. (2004). Democracy and filtering. Communications Of The ACM, 47(12),

57–61. Surowiecki, J. (2005). The wisdom of crowds. New York: Anchor Books. Tabakoff, N. (2009, May 8). News Corp explores e-news pay model. The Australian.

Online. Retrieved October 29, 2009, from http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/news/news-explores-e-news-pay-model/story-e6frg906-1225710549647

Taintor, D. (2012, December 3). The Daily staffers to meet at 11 AM, 6 PM to discuss details of closure. Talking Points Memo Retrieved March 18, 2013, from http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/daily-staffers-to-meet-at-11-am-6

Tait, R. (2007). From seesaw to wagon wheel: Safeguarding impartiality in the 21st century. London: BBC Trust.

Taranto, J. (2008, April 3). [Personal Communication]. Taylor, V. (2008, April 8). [Personal Communication]. TED (Producer). (2011, May). Eli Pariser: Beware online "filter bubbles". TED

Talks. [Video] Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/eli_pariser_beware_online_filter_bubbles.html

Thacker, T. (2006). An editor's tips on getting published. Citizen Journalism Theory and Practice. Retrieved May 27, 2006, from http://english.ohmynews.com/articleview/article_view.asp?menu=c10400&no=294953&rel_no=1

The Daily. (2011). About. Retrieved December 17, 2012, from http://www.thedaily.com/about

300

Thomas, P. (2012, January). Twitter in the live reporting of #stephenlawrence. BBC College of Journalism. Retrieved October 23, 2012, from http://bbcjournalism.oup.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/blog/2012/01/twitter-in-the-live-reporting.shtml

Thompson, M. (2008, January 15). The trouble with trust: Building confidence in institutions. BBC Press Office. Retrieved March 27, 2008, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/speeches/stories/thompson_trust.shtml

Thompson, M. (2011, September 26). The future of journalism in the UK. Reuters Media File. Retrieved March 16, 2012, from http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/2011/09/26/the-future-of-journalism-in-the-uk/

Thomson, R. (Producer). (2007, January 3). From the editorial desk of The Times: Trends in journalism Public Lecture Series. [Audio] Retrieved from http://www.ac.rmit.edu.au/accontent/rthomson/rthomsonlecture.mp3

Thorsen, E. (2009). News, citizenship and the Internet: BBC News Online's reporting of the 2005 UK general election. (Doctor of Philosophy Thesis), Bournemouth University, UK.

Tiffen, R, & Kwak, K. (2005). Cable television and democratization in Taiwan and South Korea. In M. Bromley & A. Romano (Eds.), Journalism and democracy in Asia (pp. 135–147). London: Routledge.

Tillotson, S. (Producer). (2010, June 30). New Rules For TV News? The Media Show. [Radio Broadcast] Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmesb00sv6fy - synopsis

Tillotson, S. (Producer). (2012, November 14). The crisis at the BBC. [Radio Broadcast] Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01ntgsw

Tinworth, A. (2012, September 4). Joanna Geary: So, that online community stuff––It's all sorted now? One Man and His Blog. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from http://www.onemanandhisblog.com/archives/2012/09/joanna_geary_so_that_online_community_st.html - comment-640584722

Townend, J. (2011). Face the future: Tools for the modern media age. Paper presented at the News Rewired Conference, London.

Tremayne, M. (2007). Blogging, citizenship, and the future of media. London: Routledge.

Tuchman, G. (1972). Objectivity as strategic ritual: An examination of newsmen's notions of objectivity. American Journal of Sociology, 77(4), 660–679.

Turner, D. (2012). Inside the BBC's verification hub. Nieman Reports, Summer. Turner, G. (2010). Ordinary people and the media (eBook ed.). Los Angeles: Sage. Ushahidi. (2008). About us. Retrieved December 22, 2012, from

http://ushahidi.com/about-us Ushahidi. (2012a). Crowdmap. Retrieved December 22, 2012, from

http://crowdmap.com/ Ushahidi (Producer). (2012b, September 27). What is the Ushahidi platform?

[Video] Retrieved from http://ushahidi.com/ Vagg, T., Guest, S., & Reid, S. (2010). Quantitative audience research assessing the

BBC's delivery of its public purposes - UK findings. London: BBC Trust. Van Dijck, J. (2011). Tracing Twitter: The rise of a microblogging platform.

International Journal of Media and Cultural Politics, 7(3), 1–16. Van Klaveren, A. (2003, November 25). Newsgathering. BBC News. Retrieved

December 13, 2007, from

301

http://news.bbc.co.uk/aboutbbcnews/hi/this_is_bbc_news/newsid_3280000/3280443.stm

Walton, C. (2012, January 25). Social media training is getting results for the BBC. BBC College of Journalism. Retrieved February 16, 2012, from http://bbcjournalism.oup.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/blog/2012/01/social-media-training-is-getti.shtml

Wardle, C., & Williams, A. (2008). ugc@thebbc (pp. 1–63). Cardiff: Cardiff School of Journalism, Media and Cultural Studies.

Watkinson, T. (2009). Welcome to global minds. Global Minds Blog. Retrieved February 18, 2009, from https://http://www.bbcglobalminds.com/cs/blogs/globalminds/archive/2009/02.aspx

Weinberger, D. (2008). The morality of links. In J. Turow & L. Tsui (Eds.), The hyperlinked society: Questioning connections in the digital age (pp. 181–190). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Wellman, B. (2001). Computer networks as social networks. Science, 293(5537). Wells, M. (2011, March 28). How live blogging has transformed journalism.

Guardian. Retrieved January 2, 2012, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/mar/28/live-blogging-transforms-journalism

White, S. (1996). Reporting in Australia (2nd ed.). South Melbourne, Victoria: Macmillan.

Who killed the newspaper? (2006, August 24). Economist. Retrieved from http://www.economist.com/node/7830218

Wilby, P. (2012, May 30). Alan Rusbridger: The quiet evangelist. New Statesman. Retrieved August 3, 2012, from http://www.newstatesman.com/media/media/2012/05/guardian-editor-alan-rusbridger-peter-wilby

Williams, A., Wardle, C., & Wahl-Jorgensen. (2011). Have they got news for us? Journalism Practice, 5(1), 85–99.

Williamson, A. (2010). Digital citizens and democratic participation. London: Hansard Society.

Willmott, N. (2010, April 12). Open door. Guardian. Retrieved January 11, 2012, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/apr/12/nicknames-online-not-newspaper?INTCMP=SRCH

Wilson, F. (2009, July 26). Why comments matter. AVC: Musings of a VC in NYC. Retrieved September 29, 2009, from http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2009/07/why-comments-matter.html

Wilson, G. (2011, May 11). Our next step in news blogging. The Editors. Retrieved May 25, 2011, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2011/05/

Wilson, P. (2008, April 10). [Personal Communication]. Windschuttle, K. (1998). Journalism versus cultural studies. Australian Studies in

Journalism, 7, 3–31. Woo-Young, C. (2005). The Internet, alternative public sphere and political

dynamism: Korea's non-gaek* (polemist) websites The Pacific Review, 18(3), 393–415.

Wunsch-Vincent, S., & Vickery, G. (2006). Participative Web: User-created content Working Party on the Information Economy (pp. 1–74): Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

Yahr, E. (2007). Crowded house. American Journalism Review, October/November.

302

Yin, R. (1989). Case study research: Design and methods (Revised ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Zelizer, B. (2004). Taking journalism seriously: News and the academy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Zhao, Y. (Ed.). (2012). Understanding China's media system in a world historical context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Zuniga, H. (2009). Blogs, journalism, and political participation. In Z. Papacharissi (Ed.), Journalism and citizenship: New agendas in communication (pp. 108–122). New York: Routledge.